I'm sure this has been asked before, but why do demos have limited uses?

#71Iceberg73ePosted 1/19/2013 3:09:33 PM
From: Sir_Haxor | #069
Iceberg73e posted...
If someone has played the demo 30 times and has yet to buy the game, they are probably never going to buy the game. Since demos are distributed to convince the people on the fence of actually buy the game, the letting people continue to play a demo of a game they will never buy is just fruitless.


If someone isn't buying a game because they keep playing the demo, what makes you think they would have bought the game if there was no demo to begin with?

Only Nintendo fanboys would argue for limited demos.


What type of argument are you trying to make? I am saying I am arguing for or against the matter. I just understand the logic behind. So what's the point of saying an irrelevant comments that takes absolutely nothing I said into a context that was never mentioned.
---
Ill lick all fanboys ass! - arsios
#72king_darksPosted 1/19/2013 3:13:09 PM
Grand Kirby posted...
But there's still no clear point on including limits at all.

Demos only contain an extremely small portion of the game. No one is going to not buy a game because a demo will somehow be so satisfactory that they won't need the real game at all. Likewise, Nintendo doesn't lose anything whether someone plays a demo 31 times or 1 time. So what's the point of having limits on top of that? It's pointless and it also manages to be extremely stupid.


The limit is to encourage users to purchase the full title to get their Fill of the game instead of relying on the demo for it as all the demo was meant for was a taste. Giving somebody a demo with unlimited uses is giving somebody a small asset of the full game for free. Businesses are not charity cases and if they can't persuade you to purchase the full title then there no sense in giving you anything free. While I'm not trying to argue that having less is not a bad thing I'm just trying to explain why this isn't a stupid idea.
---
School days are back.
#73SMASHKING84Posted 1/19/2013 3:19:46 PM
Sir_Haxor posted...
Iceberg73e posted...
If someone has played the demo 30 times and has yet to buy the game, they are probably never going to buy the game. Since demos are distributed to convince the people on the fence of actually buy the game, the letting people continue to play a demo of a game they will never buy is just fruitless.


If someone isn't buying a game because they keep playing the demo, what makes you think they would have bought the game if there was no demo to begin with?

Only Nintendo fanboys would argue for limited demos.


i'm a huge nintendo fanboy and even i won't defend this. i guess there's a difference between a fanboy and a blind yesman.

fanboys at least rational ones are like me will defend nintendo if we think what they did WASN'T stupid or anti-consumer but if we see them doing something like this we'll call them on it.

basically person a."i hate nintendo there console is one gen behind!"
rational fanboy:no it's not
blind fanboy(yesman*) "WHO CARES IF IT IS?"
scenario two
person a i think demoes with limit are stupid
rational fanboy yes your right,i agree
yesman* "WHO CARES IF IT IS?"

*basically i'm parodying a specific nintendo fan base that literally states who care if it is about something stupid.
---
Jirachi is the best pokemon ppl who agree:3
Final Fantasty vi is the best game ever!
#74king_darksPosted 1/19/2013 3:23:32 PM
Sir_Haxor posted...
Iceberg73e posted...
If someone has played the demo 30 times and has yet to buy the game, they are probably never going to buy the game. Since demos are distributed to convince the people on the fence of actually buy the game, the letting people continue to play a demo of a game they will never buy is just fruitless.


If someone isn't buying a game because they keep playing the demo, what makes you think they would have bought the game if there was no demo to begin with?

Only Nintendo fanboys would argue for limited demos.


WTF are trying to say? There are demos With limited uses so those whom wouldn't buy the game can't enjoy a free asset forever.
---
School days are back.
#75Iceberg73ePosted 1/19/2013 3:28:52 PM
From: SMASHKING84 | #070
Iceberg73e posted...
If someone has played the demo 30 times and has yet to buy the game, they are probably never going to buy the game. Since demos are distributed to convince the people on the fence of actually buy the game, the letting people continue to play a demo of a game they will never buy is just fruitless.


so by your logic because i never played the order up demo,or style savy's demo the demo shouldn't exist?

demos shouldn't be restricted because a person only plays it x ammount of times.
think of it like this if i only play my games one time*(from beginning to end) does that mean that EVERYBODY'S copy of that game should automatically self destruct after one use?


like i said i OWN physical copies of oot but i still play the demo on brawl.
why? because i can,simple.
*i don't i never stop playing my games,in smb in example i beat that game at least 100 times,the point is many people only play there games until they beat them then sell them. but that doesn't mean you should kill replay value for those who want it.


How does any of this pertain to the argument? Did I mention never playing the demo? Absolutely not. The highlighted section makes no sense in the context of the argument, other than overexaggerated a point that is even made. All that I am saying I could see the logic behind the limits set.
---
Ill lick all fanboys ass! - arsios
#76Grand KirbyPosted 1/19/2013 3:29:23 PM
From: king_darks | #072
The limit is to encourage users to purchase the full title to get their Fill of the game instead of relying on the demo for it as all the demo was meant for was a taste. Giving somebody a demo with unlimited uses is giving somebody a small asset of the full game for free. Businesses are not charity cases and if they can't persuade you to purchase the full title then there no sense in giving you anything free. While I'm not trying to argue that having less is not a bad thing I'm just trying to explain why this isn't a stupid idea.


But my argument is that most demos are so short that they don't even come close to equaling the experience of the full game, so there's no point in limiting it.

It isn't like eating a free sample of a snack from a store where it would make sense to put a cap on it. It's more like being able to watch the first two minutes of a movie for free. It doesn't matter if you're able to watch those two minutes an unlimited number of times, that's not going to be equal to buying and watching the entire movie, so being restrictive of it is pretty pointless.
---
Okay, I rolled a 14. What's that mean? Hsu
That you're a cheater. This is a 12-sided die. Chan
#77Sir_HaxorPosted 1/19/2013 3:44:32 PM
king_darks posted...
Sir_Haxor posted...
Iceberg73e posted...
If someone has played the demo 30 times and has yet to buy the game, they are probably never going to buy the game. Since demos are distributed to convince the people on the fence of actually buy the game, the letting people continue to play a demo of a game they will never buy is just fruitless.


If someone isn't buying a game because they keep playing the demo, what makes you think they would have bought the game if there was no demo to begin with?

Only Nintendo fanboys would argue for limited demos.


WTF are trying to say? There are demos With limited uses so those whom wouldn't buy the game can't enjoy a free asset forever.


I don't know how else to break this down.

If I keep playing my Wind Waker demo but never buy the actual game devs are not losing a sale. There is no proof that I would have paid for the full game had there been no demo.

People who play demos infinitely are not getting access to free content.
---
3DS Friend Code: 0559-6940-0140
The Official Anguished One and Chaos Hero of the Shin Megami Tensei IV board
#78king_darksPosted 1/19/2013 3:45:05 PM
Grand Kirby posted...


But my argument is that most demos are so short that they don't even come close to equaling the experience of the full game, so there's no point in limiting it.

A demo carries the core assets of the Main game and allowed it to be played. Of course the full game is much more expansive in everyway but in general a demo is what the full game is at the core. It purpose is to allow a taste of the full game. This can be acomplished by 30 or unlimited uses. However by limited it to 30 people can't abuse the demo to try to get their fill of the franchise. Eventually if they want to continue to play the series they'll have to purchase the full game. This is a solid enough reason to limit. Besides 30 is still pretty generous in it's own right.

It isn't like eating a free sample of a snack from a store where it would make sense to put a cap on it.

There more then 1 reason to put a cap on it. Assume supplies was unlimited. If their was no cap people would eat to their hearts content untill they get their fill of the food. If there was a cap people would eventually have to fork over the cash if they wish to enjoy it some more. This is done in hope of people enjoying what little they gotten so much to eventually develop a craving for it that has to be satisfy by buying the core product. Good for the business. Bad for fatties.

It's more like being able to watch the first two minutes of a movie for free.

Movies offer significantly less content then a demo and last for a far shorter time. There is also a much greater emphasis on plot in a movie and the progression is linear compared to game where you are allowed a fair amount of freedom in the way you play.



It doesn't matter if you're able to watch those two minutes an unlimited number of times, that's not going to be equal to buying and watching the entire movie, so being restrictive of it is pretty pointless

Debunked because of above.
---
School days are back.
#79Sir_HaxorPosted 1/19/2013 3:50:07 PM
Grand Kirby posted...
From: king_darks | #072
The limit is to encourage users to purchase the full title to get their Fill of the game instead of relying on the demo for it as all the demo was meant for was a taste. Giving somebody a demo with unlimited uses is giving somebody a small asset of the full game for free. Businesses are not charity cases and if they can't persuade you to purchase the full title then there no sense in giving you anything free. While I'm not trying to argue that having less is not a bad thing I'm just trying to explain why this isn't a stupid idea.


But my argument is that most demos are so short that they don't even come close to equaling the experience of the full game, so there's no point in limiting it.

It isn't like eating a free sample of a snack from a store where it would make sense to put a cap on it. It's more like being able to watch the first two minutes of a movie for free. It doesn't matter if you're able to watch those two minutes an unlimited number of times, that's not going to be equal to buying and watching the entire movie, so being restrictive of it is pretty pointless.


If you watch those 2 minutes enough times, eventually it will be considered piracy.

True story.
---
3DS Friend Code: 0559-6940-0140
The Official Anguished One and Chaos Hero of the Shin Megami Tensei IV board
#80Iceberg73ePosted 1/19/2013 3:53:38 PM
From: Sir_Haxor | #077
king_darks posted...
Sir_Haxor posted...
Iceberg73e posted...
If someone has played the demo 30 times and has yet to buy the game, they are probably never going to buy the game. Since demos are distributed to convince the people on the fence of actually buy the game, the letting people continue to play a demo of a game they will never buy is just fruitless.


If someone isn't buying a game because they keep playing the demo, what makes you think they would have bought the game if there was no demo to begin with?

Only Nintendo fanboys would argue for limited demos.


WTF are trying to say? There are demos With limited uses so those whom wouldn't buy the game can't enjoy a free asset forever.


I don't know how else to break this down.

If I keep playing my Wind Waker demo but never buy the actual game devs are not losing a sale. There is no proof that I would have paid for the full game had there been no demo.

People who play demos infinitely are not getting access to free content.


And where was it mentioned at all there someone on the fence would have paid for the game if there had been no demo? People can still get access demo, why should companies cater to people who are just going to play the demo indefinitely with no intention of purchasing the game?

Take it as the CostCo example. Costco will provide you free samples of the product in hopes you are buy that very product, but there is a limit to how you can take especially once they figure out that you have no intentions of buying the product at all.
---
Ill lick all fanboys ass! - arsios