Demo's vs Downloads

You know, I've found recently that Demo's just don't give you enough room to try a game out. Demo's usually tend to have massive limiters on actual gameplay, thus distorting the possibilities. Sure you wonder what the stuff which is being held back does, but do you really want to waste your money on a game which could be potentially crap in the long run? Demo's can be quite misleading. What is wrong with downloading a game to test out its full capabilities, then decide whether you want to buy it? The trouble with contemporary gaming is that quality isn't always there. Companies these days seem to be pumping out games, many of which I personally find to suck beyond belief compared to past standards. For example, the current Graphics vs Story and Gameplay debate. Many companies seem to pride themselves on their games high graphics, but when you really get down to it, a game is all about the gameplay and in most cases, the games story.

Take Sins as an example of a game with no story, which prides itself on gameplay rather than graphics, though the graphics are pretty good for what it is. (Then add in Bailknights Graphics Mod for combat and all is well in the visual department)

So why can't we download a game in order to try it out, then decide after that trial run that we like it enough for the game to be deserved of purchase? At the moment, demo's hardly ever seem to be sufficient enough to make arrive at a conclusion as to the worth of purchasing a game. This is something I have been wondering for a while actually, as I've seen these debates constantly. I myself see nothing wrong with downloading to try before buy. I do however see something wrong with downloading to sell, or downloading to play alot but never buy. Of course companies need us to buy their games in order to keep producing new stuff, but why the heck should we fuel companies which don't seem too provide the quality of gameplay and story which a game so desperately needs (Not always story of course, as Sins is a good example of a game which runs almost solely on gameplay)

Indeed pirates are possibly an issue for most companies, such as the ones which actually count pirates as being a part of the market, but why should those who download merely to try before they buy be looked down upon, just because they wanted to test for quality before investing their hard earned money?

You can't always trust game reviews. I myself believe that reviewers get paid under the table to make good reviews on some games, because in those cases I myself can't agree with a 9 out of 10, when the game only puts out a 6 out of 10 in quality. I can't bring myself to believe that games get high scores just because of graphics, and in some cases, it almost seems like the well known reviewers are as blind as bats.

 

So really. Rather than being about piracy, this thread is about the debate of demo's to try a game before buying versus downloading to try a game before buying.

19,664 views 4 replies
Reply #1 Top
Bioshock had a really good demo. 45 minute time limit, but a lot of what the full game had.

Speaking of game reviews... check out the latest alone in the dark or Driv3r and wonder what Atari did with those who gave the games good ratings....

Reply #2 Top
What is wrong with downloading a game to test out its full capabilities, then decide whether you want to buy it?


If the owner of the game allows it, there is nothing wrong. If the owner of the game does not want you to, it is wrong to disregard their intellectual and property rights and forcefully take what you want.

So why can't we download a game in order to try it out, then decide after that trial run that we like it enough for the game to be deserved of purchase?


Because it is illegal (in most places).

why should those who download merely to try before they buy be looked down upon, just because they wanted to test for quality before investing their hard earned money?


Because they broke the law for no other purpose than their own entertainment (and possibly greed).

I myself believe that reviewers get paid under the table to make good reviews on some games, because in those cases I myself can't agree with a 9 out of 10, when the game only puts out a 6 out of 10 in quality.


Welcome to life, where people are allowed to have opinions. Game reviews, like movie reviews, book reviews, and reviews of every other form of entertainment media, are wholly opinion pieces. My suggestion would be to do more research, in the amount of time (with the same amount or even less effort) that it would take to find, download, and play a pirated version of the game you could check forums, other review sites, and the good ol' word of mouth approach to find what most people think of the game, and who are definitely not speaking for profit.

Rather than being about piracy, this thread is about the debate of demo's to try a game before buying versus downloading to try a game before buying.


I added the emphasis since that is the very definition of software piracy, obtaining and using a retail version illegally.

One can dress the issue up however they like it, but in the end it boils down to the simple fact that one is breaking the law for their own entertainment (or possibly greed).
Reply #3 Top
When i'm looking for a game, i check a couple of reviews, couple of user reviews (a 0/10 review and a 11/10 review, gives exaggerated facts about pros and cons), and the gameplay forum. I also play the demo if one is available. Usually i want try it before buying, but the community's opinion can be enough.

I mainly use demos to see if my system can run the game adequatly, and the community and reviews to see if the game is for me.

Remember Doom? You got one third of the game as shareware, and id released a new episode for free.
Reply #4 Top
Some new demos have been great. If you really want to complain, complain about demos from the late 90's/early 21st century. Those dumbass 1 level demos were what started to kill the pc industry.