[rtrooney]

I am of the opinion that every game developer needs to provide a demo of his/her game. It's a pre-purchase prerequisite

I no longer can trust developers to provide a quality game sight-unseen.

Maybe others are more trusting than I.

[kadji-kun]

I agree, but I prefer not to play Demo's for the sake of avoiding spoilers or the like.

I decision is based off of Reviews over demos. I usually only look at the score instead of reading the review though. AG reviews by far I can trust.

[tsa]

I agree, I usually play the demo before buying a game. I don't mind the spoilers; usually the demo is just a portion of the beginning of a game, and when you bought the game you can often use a saved game from the demo and just continue.

[WRMW]

I almost never play demos -- I just find them to be too much of a hassle. I tend to buy my games based on reviews (and on impulse). Chances are even if a demo is poor, if I was interested enough to download it, I'll be compelled to finish the game regardless, on the hopes it will be worth it.

Unfortunately this sometimes leads to disappointing games.

[DustyShinigami]

Yep, i prefer playing a demo first before buying the game. This applied to Still Life. I think i read the review on here first, downloaded a demo off GamersHell, played it and loved it. Then went shopping around for a copy on amazon/ebay. If no demos are available then i'll just read some reviews and make my own decision. At least with a demo, i can try it for myself and see if it's my kind of game.

[Trumgottist]

Originally Posted by rtrooney

I am of the opinion that every game developer needs to provide a demo of his/her game.

I refuse!

Spoiler:

But I don't ask you to purchase my games either.

Originally Posted by kadji-kun

I decision is based off of Reviews over demos. I usually only look at the score instead of reading the review though.

I've always thought arguments over review scores was silly. Surely people go by the text, instead of relying on a simple number that can't say much at all about the game? Apparently I was wrong.

[kadji-kun]

Originally Posted by Trumgottist

I refuse!

Spoiler:

But I don't ask you to purchase my games either.

I've always thought arguments over review scores was silly. Surely people go by the text, instead of relying on a simple number that can't say much at all about the game? Apparently I was wrong.

When you rate a song you like. Do you write a long description on the song reasoning why you like the song? Its the simplicity of numbers that define ratings.

There are also things called Pros and Cons. These are just a couple of lines. Great way to figure out what are the good and bad things about a game. I don't like discriminating between games. If a game has a good rating, I'll try it, even if its not the type of game I usually play.

[Ascovel]

Originally Posted by kadji-kun

When you rate a song you like. Do you write a long description on the song reasoning why you like the song? Its the simplicity of numbers that define ratings.

There are also things called Pros and Cons. These are just a couple of lines. Great way to figure out what are the good and bad things about a game. I don't like discriminating between games. If a game has a good rating, I'll try it, even if its not the type of game I usually play.

So in your opinion there's no point in writing reviews at all?

Sometimes, through reading of a review with bad rating I can find out that I will probably like the reviewed game. I guess I must be discriminating games, because my own tastes are often very different to those of a particular reviewer and I play only what I personally think will be interesting (which doesn't mean that such reviewer's reviews are worthless to me).

[Trumgottist]

Originally Posted by kadji-kun

When you rate a song you like. Do you write a long description on the song reasoning why you like the song?

Not if the rating is intended only for myself (such as in iTunes), but if I were to tell you I rated the song currently playing (For Your Love - Herman's Hermits) three stars, that doesn't tell you much about anything. The most information in that sentence is that I have Herman's Hermits in my playlist, but you don't know what the three stars mean.

At best, a rating is a very crude indicator. At worst, it's misleading.

Originally Posted by kadji-kun

Its the simplicity of numbers that define ratings.

Yes. It's also that simplicity that makes them deceptive.

Originally Posted by Ascovel

Sometimes, through reading of a review with bad rating I can find out that I will probably like the reviewed game.

Or the other way around. I'm not going to like all games with high scores, but a well written review may tell me if the game is for me or not.

EDIT: I should add that if the only-look-at-the-ratings thing is working for you, well, good for you. I just found it odd.

[stepurhan]

The problem with only looking at a rating is you're only getting a snapshot of someone's overall opinion. In the body of a review a reviewer might say things they think are good and things they think are bad that are the precise opposite of your personal preferences. This is why I tend to read more than one review (and read the text as well) so I can get a more rounded picture.

Whilst I'm not sure it's practical for EVERY game to have a demo (presumably there would be some more work in creating a separate but workable piece of game) I can see the value. A demo will practically demonstrate whether the game is for you or not. With a review you're relying on someone highlighting all the things that matter on your behalf.

[Ksandra]

I'm with the OP, personally. These days I very rarely buy games without trying a demo first, and when I do I usually regret it.

[cwapitm]

Sometimes I play demos before trying the game, but usually they take too long for me to download. Sometimes the demo doesn't even reflect how would like the game either. For instance I played the Barrow Hill demo, and I didn't like it, but then when I played the full game I really enjoyed it.

[Jatsie]

The problem with demos is that they have the ability to suffer from film trailer syndrome. If you think of the times you've seen a trailer for a film, and have thought "that looks like it appeals to my tastes" only to watch the film and find that it was nothing like what you were expecting. The purpose of a demo is to showcase the game in the best light as possible, so it's going to avoid advertising any shortcomings and therefore is not necessarily going to be indicative of the final product. Personally I'd rather read an objective review of a game by someone who has played the entire thing, than personally play a 15 minute snippet of it, that was created by someone whose sole motivation is to make you buy the complete article.

[mosdl]

Plus demos allow you to make sure your computer can run the game.

[rtrooney]

Originally Posted by doron

Plus demos allow you to make sure your computer can run the game.

That's a BIG plus. There was a Scratches demo, and I loved it. Unfortunately there was no Scratches Director's Cut demo. The former played on my computer. The latter did not. Money wasted.

[ThePillarOfLight]

There are two reasons I find demos useful, and a must for any pc game.

1. PC games, unlike console games, cannot be rented. This is most unfortunate when one prefers to try a game before buying it, watch a movie before buying it, etc. Free demos solve this problem, to some extent, by letting players see enough to know whether they're hooked or totally uninterested.

2. Compatibility. Yes, a list of system requirements is good, but not definite. A playable demo shows you just how smoothly a game will run on your system before you go to all the trouble of buying it. Plus, if you're like me and aren't always able to afford new hardware just to play better games, it shows you just how far you can stretch your current hardware, which might in the gray area according to the system requirements list. I know I've found a couple games that were sketchy on the sys reqs, but ended up running reasonably well, and some that didn't run at all because one req was off.

[rtrooney]

Originally Posted by stepurhan

The problem with only looking at a rating is you're only getting a snapshot of someone's overall opinion.

Because of that, it is important to be absolutely familiar with the reviewer and his/her preferences. How else can the review be meaninful...numerically or textually?

There was a music reviewer who's tastes were so opposite of mine that I could trust his reviews without question. He liked an album, I wouldn't buy it. He hated it, it went to the top of my shopping list. I was rarely disappointed.

Because reviews are, by and large, anonymous, I do not have that comfort level. So while any given review might reflect my opinion of the game, I have no way of knowing that for sure.

That's why I prefer a demo to a review.

[DustyShinigami]

Only problem i have with demos (some but not all) is not being able to save. Granted, some demos are short enough that you don't need to save. But i have played a few where they were a bit longer than expected and couldn't friggin' save. The Dracula: Origin demo is a perfect example of this because i struggled with a few of the puzzles in the graveyard, took too long on them, eventually had enough and quit. I would've saved it at that point and come back to it later, but no...

Didn't fancy the idea of traipsing through it again just to get to the end of the demo. I usually do that, if i haven't lost interest, but couldn't be bothered and the demo had served its purpose anyhow.

[Sik]

Slight derail, but do any companies still make demos with content that is separate from the retail game? I remember I absolutely adored the Space Quest 6 demo, and I think I've seen a few others, but can't recall the name of them. I guess it was easier to justify the extra cost of a demo back in the day when game demos were mostly distributed with gaming magazines, though. I'd pay for the demos (well technically for the magazine, but I'd spend more time with the cover CD than the reviews), and compare them to other demos on the same CD, before making a decision to buy a game.

[skeeter_93]

Originally Posted by Sik

Slight derail, but do any companies still make demos with content that is separate from the retail game? I remember I absolutely adored the Space Quest 6 demo, and I think I've seen a few others, but can't recall the name of them. I guess it was easier to justify the extra cost of a demo back in the day when game demos were mostly distributed with gaming magazines, though. I'd pay for the demos (well technically for the magazine, but I'd spend more time with the cover CD than the reviews), and compare them to other demos on the same CD, before making a decision to buy a game.

I tend to stay away from demos because I feel like I've ruined part of the game. If I find out a demo is different from the game, then I'll try it. I think I've only come across that once though, and I don't remember what game it was.