Ben-DutkaAs some of you may have already heard, EA wants to try charging for lengthy game demos as part of their "premium downloadable content" plan. Unsurprisingly, this didn't go over well with gamers, but Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli has defended this idea.
In speaking to Develop , Yerli says free game demos will go the way of the dodo and added that he was currently unsure about a Crysis 2 demo. He calls free demos a "luxury" that is actually "prohibitively expensive" for the developer and that the "reality is that we might not see any free game demos in the long term." Now, it should probably be noted that EA just so happens to be the publisher for Crysis 2 so maybe it isn't surprising that Yerli would defend their plans. However, he still believes it has merit; in responding to the backlash, he said:
"I read a lot about this, and read about the backlash as well; people complaining that they would essentially be paying for a beta. I think EA’s strategy is interesting, overall. The thing is, every time we see a publisher doing something to improve the industry, making things more commercially viable and actually increasing the market, people instantly think this is only some money-hungry ploy."
We do have to agree with him there. There's a quick knee-jerk reaction amongst the gaming community that regards all such plans as rip-off schemes designed to take advantage of the "little person." It gets a little tiring hearing so many people complain bitterly about very small fees for something that, if it were a similar service in any other industry, you would most certainly pay. In short, it seems Yerli believes gamers are a touch spoiled (and a touch cheap), and in that, I have to agree with him to some extent.
As for EA's plan, he believes it just wasn't explained properly. He says that although it may appear one way on the surface, it's really "an attempt to salvage a problem:"
"The industry is still losing a lot of money to piracy as the market becomes more online-based. So it’s encouraging to see strategies outlined to combat this.
I think the whole issue needs to be explained in a better way, because there is good thinking behind EA’s plan. I understand why people are thinking that all EA wants to do is maximise profits out of the audience, but really, what it’s really trying to do is get investment back but while being as fair to the gamer as much as it can. Ultimately, it will be a better deal for the gamer."
And given the cost and "time pressure" required to release a quality demo, Yerli says it can be very difficult to deal with and he won't guarantee a demo for Crysis 2 . But now that he's said his piece, we'd be interested to hear what other developers have to say about this… Ninja Theory told everyone Heavenly Sword didn't sell well enough to warrant a sequel, and the game sold 1.5 million copies…to most designers with realistic expectations, that'd be a smash hit. So are Yerli's observations universal or is he in the minority in the dev crowd…?
Related Game(s): Crysis 2
I did not attack you. LMAO.
so hes indirectly pushing for used game sales since gamestop allows you to try the game for 7 days and still get a full refund. i wonder if they considered that?
Crazy move, I highly doubt any sane person would buy a demo. The thing is that most people have a budget and the thing with budgets is that you spend it on products and not to buy a lot of demo's and then not having any budget left to buy the actual product.
I think it's gonna save me some cash then. I will not buy any demo, I just rent the game or in doubt wait till it hits the budget box.
@ " CRY"tek, can i get a demo for the paid demo to see if i like the demo.
I'm surprised that Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli hasn't tried to charge the site, "Develop", for listening to his sound bite too.
Or has he?????
Watch out Ben or else you might get charged for mentioning the Crytek Engine in an article.
Surely the main point of a demo is to get as many people as possible to play it, then like it enough to purchase the full priced game.
By charging for the demo, isn't that reducing the potential market for that game and the potential sales.
Ok, fine… The publishers own risk. If you are reducing the marketing costs then you will probably reduce your sales.
Interesting. I know they wouldn't get a cent out of me. There are some games I always intend to buy. I don't need a demo to convince me so I'm certainly not going to pay to trial it.
The flip side would be for the games I am on the fence about. If I wasn't sure that I would want to buy the game, Why would I pay ANYTHING out if I wan't even sure I would like it. I'll just do without altogether. That's the safer bet.
The publishers and Devs who would gain the most would be those with the most hype but who produced a sub par game. I offer Haze as an example.
This game received typically bad reviews and so revenue generation was low. But how many gamers downloaded the demo?
They'll be thinking that if each demo had charged $3-$5 they could have been less concerned about poor game sales.
Gotta call BS on this one…
"It gets a little tiring hearing so many people complain bitterly about very small fees for something that, if it were a similar service in any other industry, you would most certainly pay."
What other industry? you do not pay to watch a movie trailer! Some magazine companies let you view them for free online and amazon lets you have a peek at a book before buying for free. I do not see any validness to your statement or argument. What other industry would even do this. A demo is a way to entice someone to purchace your game. Who charges to entice? If I have to start paying for demo's then I will ultimately be buying less and less games, for I use demos as a way of determining a purchase. I have bought many of games that I was not initially interested in just because I enjoyed the demo. but I will not pay for a demo that is absurd. If a demo is $5 then you buy the game well you just shelled out $65 bucks+tax. No this will not help the industry. the old adage goes "you have to spend money to make money" so if a demo gets a sale from someone that might not of purchased your game, then that demo in essence IS Payed For without a FEE!
Last edited by krazzymoose on 4/20/2010 1:49:29 AM
hello …
on other sites i've already voiced out against this!
any form of advert should be delivered freely to potential customers.
i'm a big demo consumer. have had more than a 100 just before the FW3.21 update (had to delete before backup) …i didn't finish all the demos, didn't have too for some games like Darksiders before i rush ordering the game.
well i did play full the GOW3 & Dante's Inferno demo, even if i was sure buying these games, the demo did make me feel the urge of doing so.
from the 10 games purchased off PSN, 8 were demo to full version upgrade & for disc based i went straight to order inFamous (like most i just played the demo for less than 15 minutes, stopped it & went ordering.)
so OK, if they think demo shouldn't be free, too bad for future sales.
quoting myself here: i'll pay for a demo ONLY if it doesn't form part of the final game & if it adds some optional value to the game itself, like a side story, the possibility to use same character with experiences & assets, some free or exclusive paid DLCs …
else, a demo (for demonstration) isn't a full product & cannot be sold.
in my part of the world i'm seeked for gaming advice, i rarely recommend a game i never tried myself & i never give reviews, but appreciations of such games, i have a lot of friends who are followers, if i don't check out demos before i buy or advise them, then i'm sure that there would be at least more than 4 sales lost … & i'm sure it's same for most of you too .. you do advise people on games so what will happen to the market. i even organise free PS3 showcases with demos / games trailers & full games tryouts!!!
i'm starting to be really mad with Crytek & said elsewhere too that i may not buy Crysis 2 on any platform unless i can test it out somehow & if i need to rent it, i'll never buy it!
sorry for long post.
cheers!