RPG demos, what should they contain?

[Mastermind]

I've noticed a distinctive decline in the availability of trial versions for games. Was just ten years ago that virtually every game released would have a demo associated with it. Most recently, Jeff "Popamole" Vogel claimed his best selling Bioware simulator, Avadon's demo was not very good (I agree, the demo was shit, but I thought his previous demos were shit too and he praised those). He claims you can't really see what the full game would be like. I find this is generally true of any game. However, what, IMO, demos should do is give you a taste of how the game plays. When I played the shareware version of Doom 2, I do not need to try the BFG to get a good idea of what the game's combat is like. Hell, the shareware version had every weapon EXCEPT the last one, and it didn't stop the game from being a massive success. Nowadays developers try to stuff as little content as possible in games (sometimes insulting you by limiting you to something stupid like the tutorial). Neverwinter Nights comes to mind, where the rest of the game was considerably better than the shitty prologue that the demo consisted off. I almost didn't buy it because i assumed the rest of the game would be shit too (yeah yeah, codex hates NWN, but I enjoyed it well enough). So, what should a demo (rpg in particular) consist of? IMO, these elements should be present:

a) A good run-down of the multiple play styles (usually in the form of multiple classes, but if there is no class system give me a taste of the skills instead). Don't give me a mage for the first 2-3 levels, have him do nothing other than shoot generic purple magic missiles, then be surprised when I assume your game is shit. If that's all your mage can do in the full game too, you've got problems. If you have stealth options, let me see them. If you have dialogue options, let me see them. If you have melee options, let me see them. If it's a single character game and all your warrior can do is a regular melee attack, your game is shit. Don't bother with a demo. If your magic content includes more tactical spells (like D&D usually does), show some. Not everything of course, just enough to get an idea of how they play out.
b) Don't make me play your fucking tutorials. Tutorials have one purpose: to teach people how to play your game. So by all means include them, but if that's all you're gonna include, don't bother. I don't care for tutorials anymore (neither do devs, apparently, since they insist on blending them into the actual fucking games nowadays ).
3) Give me a decent area to play in. If your game is open world in particular, give me a settlement or two and a dungeon or two of decent size. Set the game later into the main game if you have to. Or even better, design an area or two just for the demo. I understand some devs have limited resources, but your resources are gonna be even more limited if you release a shit demo and nobody buys the actual game.

Examples of good demos:
Doom 2 (all weapons except the BFG, several fairly large levels to pay in), Jedi Academy(one level to showcase weapon combat, one for lightsaber combat, and IIRC they let you try out all the styles too), Command and Conquer 3 (multiplayer map with full tech trees for at least one side is near pefect when it comes to RTS. That you can cheat to play with NOD and a full tech tree for them too is heaven)

Examples of shit demos:
Dragon Age 2, Daggerfall, NWN, Diablo 2

Note the absence of RPGs in the first list and the prominence of RPGs in the second list.

 

[Excidium]

Or even better, design an area or two just for the demo. I understand some devs have limited resources, but your resources are gonna be even more limited if you release a shit demo and nobody buys the actual game.

This is the best method in my opinion. It allows the developer to show how the game plays in a mid-level range with all the important features without spoling the story or messing with the continuity.

 

[Shemar]

Or even better, design an area or two just for the demo. I understand some devs have limited resources, but your resources are gonna be even more limited if you release a shit demo and nobody buys the actual game.

This is the best method in my opinion. It allows the developer to show how the game plays in a mid-level range with all the important features without spoling the story or messing with the continuity.

I also agree with this. A game demo can never show you anything about the actual content (characters, areas, storyline), but it can show you the gameplay, how combat works, how skill progression works, how the UI works, the game's art direction, control schemes, view angles performance on your hardware.

It is usually good for making the marginal decisions but I have played demos of games I was almost certain to buy and they made me not to (The Witcher is an example) and demos of games I was probably not going to buy and decided to (can't think of an RPG one at the moment).

 

[Crooked Bee]

Set the game later into the main game if you have to.

This is a very good option, I think. Gimme some points to distribute, to make my own build, etc., and throw me right into a pickle so I could find out how the gameplay works once I've grown more or less powerful.

Designing areas just for the demo seems quite impractical, I doubt any devs would do that. Also, what if the demo areas turned out to be better that anything you'd encounter in the game itself?

 

[Mastermind]

Designing areas just for the demo seems quite impractical, I doubt any devs would do that. Also, what if the demo areas turned out to be better that anything you'd encounter in the game itself?

Off the top of my head, Starcraft's demo missions were not part of the original campaign and Raven released a Jedi Outcast demo with a mission not in the original game. Incidentally, the starcraft demo is one of the better ones out there, with the mini-campaign acting as a prologue and showcasing the campaign quite well and the multiplayer giving you full access to the terran tech tree so you can get a taste of a full blown multiplayer match.

 

[torpid]

The Starcraft demo was fucking awesome. What all demos should be like.

 

[Serious_Business]

Neverwinter Nights comes to mind, where the rest of the game was considerably better than the shitty prologue that the demo consisted off. I almost didn't buy it because i assumed the rest of the game would be shit too (yeah yeah, codex hates NWN, but I enjoyed it well enough).

 

[Shemar]

A demo specific area is not that hard to do, for a game close to release, with the engine and the toolset fully functional. They can easily do it by re-using assets already in the game, even on an existing area. For example take a cemetery filled with undead in the game and turn it into a bandit hideout for the demo (assuming bandits exist somewhere else in the game). The fact that there is no need for game-wide plot/quest links makes things even easier.

 

[Johannes]

Just including the starting part of the game should work totally fine, if the game is designed well - ie. you have diverse combat options (and possible non-combat options) to try and learn right from the beginning, and the story/setting has something to draw you in already. If that is not the case, and the beginning does not properly reflect how the rest of the game will play, it's not only a bad demo but a bad start for a game overall.

 

[deuxhero]

I'm told there were two Daggerfall demos. The first was just the tutorial dungeon, while the 2nd limited you to a version of Betony with some extra towns and was actually a pretty good example of the "whole" of DF.

Also: Damn it: Quit making we want to do JA AGAIN, I still have like... 7 or 8 NEW games to finish I may or may not ever bother with Aria of Sorrow's true ending because it needs grinding to get the 2nd half/final quarter of.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Like Fallout demo but more polished.

 

[Overweight Manatee]

Creating separate content for demos gives too much incentive to do the "we made 1 really really good area to show off, rest of the game is shit" deal. Plus, given the increasing amount of $$$ spent per hour of player playtime nowadays, the cost of creating the decent demo has gone up astronomically since the days of the Jedi knight games and Starcraft.

I think Jeff Vogel's games do a good job of demoing (Haven't tried Avadon, can't comment). Just enough of the story to get you interested, a handful of decent quests, some foreshadowing of things to come. For a story or exploration based RPG, thats fine.

For combat-centric RPGs, IMO give the player a set piece mission/quest/whatever about halfway through the game that stands on its own well enough, then give them a simple arena (and/or multiplayer if applicable) to fuck around with the combat system with about 1/2 of the abilities available.

 

[empi]

Like Fallout demo but more polished.

 

[BelisariuS.F]

The Starcraft demo was fucking awesome. What all demos should be like.

Yes, StarCraft demo was basically a prologue to the full game.

 

[Ogg]

Something like AoD's combat demo is all I need.

 

[Destroid]

Plus, given the increasing amount of $$$ spent per hour of player playtime nowadays, the cost of creating the decent demo has gone up astronomically since the days of the Jedi knight games and Starcraft.

Bullshit. I don't know what they spend their money on these days, but it isn't level designers. They could (should) also package the demo mission/level with the game, just include it as a bonus are you can play through, distinct from the usual single player.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

I think Jeff Vogel's games do a good job of demoing (Haven't tried Avadon, can't comment). Just enough of the story to get you interested, a handful of decent quests, some foreshadowing of things to come. For a story or exploration based RPG, thats fine.

The difference is that Jeff Vogel gives you the full game. You just need to unlock the full game parts to continue. In a normal game such a demo is just a part of the game that was cut out and you have to go through it again when you buy it.

 

[DwarvenFood]

Doing a separate area for the demo worked for KotC though, and the rest of the game was also up to standards.

 

[duanth123]

BG2's demo was pretty engaging...as an example of a standalone introduction to a game, which didn't require you to prematurely buy in (as in prior to their gradual development throughout the game) to certain plot elements, game mechanics, what have you

 

[bit_abuser]

Anyone remember Albion demo? Made me buy the game. It was pretty big, but the first part on Toronto (the space ship) was arguably a bit boring and there was no combat at all. So they simply included a saved game in which you had more party members, some magic items and a dungeon in front of you.

Examples of good demos:
Doom 2 (all weapons except the BFG, several fairly large levels to pay in), Jedi Academy(one level to showcase weapon combat, one for lightsaber combat, and IIRC they let you try out all the styles too), Command and Conquer 3 (multiplayer map with full tech trees for at least one side is near pefect when it comes to RTS. That you can cheat to play with NOD and a full tech tree for them too is heaven)

Heroes of Might and Magic 2 (or was it three?) was pretty good as well, had me playing for hours.

Fallout 1 demo was awesome too. Like a little stand-alone game.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Anyone remember Albion demo? Made me buy the game. It was pretty big, but the first part on Toronto (the space ship) was arguably a bit boring and there was no combat at all. So they simply included a saved game in which you had more party members, some magic items and a dungeon in front of you.

I vaguely remember playing an Albion demo which had the ship level and some other stuff.

 

[7hm]

I bought Exile 2 based entirely on the demo.

Not only was it a chance to see how the game worked, but by the time the demo ended I was invested in the story and the party I had and wanted to continue playing them.

I think it's a fine system for indie games that are going to depend more on fan support than anti-piracy measures.

For a separate demo system, AoD's was pretty good. It really doesn't tell me if the game will be any good though. Good thing for them I'd buy it regardless.