So... When will we get the demo?

[Renji64]

Nintendo really hasn't updated the demos much i don't think smash will get one.

 

[Pazzo.]

When will we get it?

You mean IF we get it.

 

[ToothiestAura]

Never.

/thread

 

[leeprtr]

Nintendo really hasn't updated the demos much i don't think smash will get one.

But tomodachi life got one, and people were exited for that.
we might get one after it releases, but that would suck.

 

[Renji64]

But tomodachi life got one, and people were exited for that.
we might get one after it releases, but that would suck.

well at least people could still try it but it would be outdated still worth it tho.

 

[Soul.]

The game is coming out soon, but it's still possible for a demo to be released. People want to play Smash 4, after all.

 

[Super FOG]

Tomodachi Life got a demo AFTER its release. And I think the idea of a demo is give to the consumers a preview of the product.

 

[Hayzie]

I really don't see the need for a demo. I'll be getting the game pretty soon anyways.

It would've mattered if they gave a like a 1 week timed demo available to all 3DS owners during the week of E3, but being so close to the release date I'd just rather wait until I get the real deal.

 

[Gamecube Kid]

I really don't see the need for a demo. I'll be getting the game pretty soon anyways.

It would've mattered if they gave a like a 1 week timed demo available to all 3DS owners during the week of E3, but being so close to the release date I'd just rather wait until I get the real deal.

I want to try before I buy. I'm not just gonna go and buy it. I want to know what it's like.

 

[Petrichor]

I want to try before I buy. I'm not just gonna go and buy it. I want to know what it's like.

When the game is released, there will almost certainly be systems set up in most major gaming stores on which you can play the game before you commit to a purchase.

 

[TheZapp]

Never
/Thread

 

[D-idara]

I really hope we get a demo soon, this is torture, especially for those who didn't get a chance to play the game at E3 or Comic-Con.

 

[LIQUID12A]

I know it won't happen, but a cut down E3 build published as a demo would rock.

 

[Gimj]

Am I the only one who actively doesn't want to play a demo? I'd rather my first experience not be on an incomplete and unfinished game. I'd rather my first experience be with a finished game, in all it's final glory, in the palm of my hand.

 

[MajorMajora]

A lot of people are forgetting the demos for Bravely Default and FE Awakening that got released well before the official release. Also, I should mention both of those were 3ds games. They both only had 30 plays, but I'd still take that over never getting a demo.

 

[LIQUID12A]

A lot of people are forgetting the demos for Bravely Default and FE Awakening that got released well before the official release.

Define "well before".

 

[RPGatWill]

Define "well before".

Demo for Fire Emblem Awakening was released on January 17th.

February 4th is when it was officially released in the states. So only about three and a half to four weeks before.

 

[MajorMajora]

Define "well before".

I don't know specifically, but from memory I believe it was around 1/2 month to a month before release. I'd expect one around september.

 

[Petrichor]

A lot of people are forgetting the demos for Bravely Default and FE Awakening that got released well before the official release. Also, I should mention both of those were 3ds games. They both only had 30 plays, but I'd still take that over never getting a demo.

No-one's forgetting those titles. As has been mentioned before in the thread, Fire Emblem isn't really all that well known outside of Japan and was on the brink of being cancelled when Awakening saved it. Smash isn't in anywhere near the same position. Most people are familiar with Smash, and it will sell millions upon millions of copies without the aid of a demo.

Bravely Default is in a similar boat to Awakening (in that it wasn't widely known) and on top of that was not made by Nintendo themselves. So Bravely Default is even less comparable to Smash than Awakening.

 

[Gamecube Kid]

Didn't sonic lost worlds get a demo before release?

 

[Petrichor]

Didn't sonic lost worlds get a demo before release?

I believe it did but again, not a Nintendo game.

 

[Gamecube Kid]

I believe it did but again, not a Nintendo game.

Nintendo still works with sega to make the games for sonic.

 

[Petrichor]

Nintendo still works with sega to make the games for sonic.

Nintendo publishes the games. Sega makes them. And Sega decide whether or not to produce a demo for the game. What Sega decides to do (or not do) is not a precedent for Nintendo. Nintendo themselves have never made a demo for one of their big, mainline titles. Therefore the odds are that we will not be getting a downloadable demo for Smash 4, however cool it would be if we did.

 

[MrGameandBalls]

I'd like a demo, but if it came out after release? No thanks, I'll already have the full game on October 3.

And I thought @ Gamecube Kid left Smashboards...

 

[Gamecube Kid]

I'd like a demo, but if it came out after release? No thanks, I'll already have the full game on October 3.

And I thought @ Gamecube Kid left Smashboards...

What made you think that?

 

[Raijinken]

Fire emblem is well known but they had a demo before release.

Fire Emblem is known. I would not go so far as to call it well known. It is, relative to the other Smash franchises (as of Brawl's roster), among the most obscure on the roster, particularly going by who has played, rather than who has heard of it. The only things that seem more obscure to me are ROB, F-Zero (and that's coming from a player who owns every stateside F-Zero game), Earthbound, Ice Climber, and possibly Metal Gear (due to some people having strong console favoritism, myself included) or Game And Watch (despite having a Gallery game on nearly every handheld from the Gameboy up to the DS). Additionally, despite the hopes of fans, not every FE game post 7 has been translated, they skipped 12 because Shadow Dragon didn't go so well Stateside. Fire Emblem is, quite literally, only known with any level of significance in America because of Smash Bros.

Case in point: When Marth and Roy showed up in Melee, everyone said "Who is that?"
And to this day we have series-ignorant people asking "Are Marth and Roy in this game?" every time a new one is released, and until Awakening, the answer was always a sigh and a flat no.


But back on topic, Smash does not need advertisement from a demo, we just all really hope there'd be a demo because we don't want to wait in line at a limited demo, or the extra weeks until release. It's pretty consistently a killer game on every system it's been released for (save arguably the N64, due to the late release of Smash there), and Nintendo could quite realistically have been completely silent about the game and it would still sell like mad on release. Their silly tournaments and the (less informative than Brawl dojo) pics of the day are fairly substantial for keeping the hype juices flowing steadily.

 

[Gamecube Kid]

Fire Emblem is known. I would not go so far as to call it well known. It is, relative to the other Smash franchises (as of Brawl's roster), among the most obscure on the roster, particularly going by who has played, rather than who has heard of it. The only things that seem more obscure to me are ROB, F-Zero (and that's coming from a player who owns every stateside F-Zero game), Earthbound, Ice Climber, and possibly Metal Gear (due to some people having strong console favoritism, myself included) or Game And Watch (despite having a Gallery game on nearly every handheld from the Gameboy up to the DS). Additionally, despite the hopes of fans, not every FE game post 7 has been translated, they skipped 12 because Shadow Dragon didn't go so well Stateside. Fire Emblem is, quite literally, only known with any level of significance in America because of Smash Bros.

Case in point: When Marth and Roy showed up in Melee, everyone said "Who is that?"
And to this day we have series-ignorant people asking "Are Marth and Roy in this game?" every time a new one is released, and until Awakening, the answer was always a sigh and a flat no.


But back on topic, Smash does not need advertisement from a demo, we just all really hope there'd be a demo because we don't want to wait in line at a limited demo, or the extra weeks until release. It's pretty consistently a killer game on every system it's been released for (save arguably the N64, due to the late release of Smash there), and Nintendo could quite realistically have been completely silent about the game and it would still sell like mad on release. Their silly tournaments and the (less informative than Brawl dojo) pics of the day are fairly substantial for keeping the hype juices flowing steadily.

The hype will also be lost if ALL the characters and the whole game get spoiled before release day in the other countries.

 

[Raijinken]

The hype will also be lost if ALL the characters and the whole game get spoiled before release day in the other countries.

Perhaps for some people, in which case they should be very careful how they tread on the internet in the three week period between Japan's and Elsewhere's releases. While some players avoid spoilers and want to be surprised, other players thrive on knowledge of what they're waiting to play. What kills one person's hype will only make my hype stronger. Just as you said you don't want to buy a game before you try, I don't want to pay for a game with an unknown amount of content.

A demo, as it were, would pose several risks, on top of the costs of making it available. As has been mentioned, some players may play it for a few minutes (in an incomplete form), decide it's too slow/floaty/bright/cheerful, and cancel their preorders without giving the proper game an honest shot. As for a development and troubleshooting stance, the vast majority of players of demos, alpha releases, beta releases, or other test builds, do not provide feedback on the state of the game. They just play it, and if it's not too buggy or broken, they just keep playing and assume each bug they see may be fixed. From a development progress stance, the feedback received (especially in a well-constsructed and usable format) is so minimal that the costs cannot justify it.

 

[Deleted member]

What made you think that?

When you got 2 warnings in like an hour, said this place was awful and you were going back to miiverse...

 

[Gamecube Kid]

When you got 2 warnings in like an hour, said this place was awful and you were going back to miiverse...

Who told you that?

 

[Deleted member]

Who told you that?

no one told me, i watched it happen.

 

[Gamecube Kid]

no one told me, i watched it happen.

Dude I never even posted it.

 

[Deleted member]

Dude I never even posted it.

It was a few weeks ago already, but whatever, lets end this before mods get invloved

 

[RPGatWill]

Perhaps for some people, in which case they should be very careful how they tread on the internet in the three week period between Japan's and Elsewhere's releases. While some players avoid spoilers and want to be surprised, other players thrive on knowledge of what they're waiting to play. What kills one person's hype will only make my hype stronger. Just as you said you don't want to buy a game before you try, I don't want to pay for a game with an unknown amount of content.

A demo, as it were, would pose several risks, on top of the costs of making it available. As has been mentioned, some players may play it for a few minutes (in an incomplete form), decide it's too slow/floaty/bright/cheerful, and cancel their preorders without giving the proper game an honest shot. As for a development and troubleshooting stance, the vast majority of players of demos, alpha releases, beta releases, or other test builds, do not provide feedback on the state of the game. They just play it, and if it's not too buggy or broken, they just keep playing and assume each bug they see may be fixed. From a development progress stance, the feedback received (especially in a well-constsructed and usable format) is so minimal that the costs cannot justify it.

That's true. I often forget that demos can just as easily drive people away from a game as bring them to it. In Smash Bros it seems likely that with a demo they would run the risk of players leaving because it's too floaty or the new fighting isn't as 'good' as melee still or something.

 

[Raijinken]

That's true. I often forget that demos can just as easily drive people away from a game as bring them to it. In Smash Bros it seems likely that with a demo they would run the risk of players leaving because it's too floaty or the new fighting isn't as 'good' as melee still or something.

It depends on the player's attitude. If they're looking for a masterfully competitive game, yet choose to try a pre-release demo, they're putting themselves at risk for judging an incomplete product with limited experience. From that stance, the demo would be particularly likely to drive off players seeking a taste of the competitive nature of the game.

On the other hand, if it were even necessary, a demo WOULD serve as a sample for players who have been living under a rock and haven't played Smash before. But even then, Smash is a primarily multiplayer experience, so (from my personal experience) most players would end up playing it first with a friend, then getting it on their own.

 

[Gamecube Kid]

That's true. I often forget that demos can just as easily drive people away from a game as bring them to it. In Smash Bros it seems likely that with a demo they would run the risk of players leaving because it's too floaty or the new fighting isn't as 'good' as melee still or something.

Or they can just asume that it's brawl2.0 that's slow and not competitive. Or they get a demo and find that it's faster than brawl but somewhat slower than melee in which they'll want to buy it.

 

[Petrichor]

Or they can just asume that it's brawl2.0 that's slow and not competitive. Or they get a demo and find that it's faster than brawl but somewhat slower than melee in which they'll want to buy it.

If the game genuinely does turn out to be competitive then Nintendo have nothing to gain sales-wise from releasing a demo, since those people will end up buying it anyway, regardless of their prior assumptions. If the game turns out to not be competitive, then Nintendo can either put people off with a demo (thus losing sales), or make a grossly misleading demo that panders to the competitive crowd in order to trick them into buying the game.

At any rate, the crowd shouting "Brawl 2.0" are a vocal minority at this stage. I can't see Nintendo going out of the way to provide a demo just to shut up a vocal minority who will buy the game anyway if it turns out to be competitive.

 

[RPGatWill]

Or they can just asume that it's brawl2.0 that's slow and not competitive. Or they get a demo and find that it's faster than brawl but somewhat slower than melee in which they'll want to buy it.

I have stated my opinion on both sides of the argument to that effect already. I was simply acknowledging @ Raijinken for bringing up some good points when he was talking about the possibility of a demo.

Smash is already popular, so a demo is unlikely. They could make one, but they don't need to make one. In fact, a lot of the reactions I've seen from people who played the E3 demo are already so mixed that I can see why that would tempt them NOT to release a demo.

People's hype for Smash Bros. can work against them in the long run. The feasibility of a demo and what impact it would have on possible consumers is the biggest point on whether or not to make a demo.

Fire Emblem Awakening? Possibly the last Fire Emblem game ever unless it sells remarkably well. However, even with advertisement through a popular franchise like Smash Bros it hadn't yet reached great numbers. Therefore release a demo to attempt to interest enough people to buy the full product. In this case, it worked.

Dead Space 3? The released demo was downloaded over 2 million times. The result? Dead Space 3's sales were cut in hal compared to the rest of the series. Dead Space 2 shipped 2 million copies its first week of release, while Dead Space three sold 605,000 in the first month.

You could say this is simply because Dead space 3 is a worse game than 2 and Awakening was a good game. However companies view this as the fault of the DEMO. If EA had not shown any demo of dead space 3, they believe they would have gotten 2 million copies in that first week again. The sad thing is THEY ARE RIGHT.

Companies care about initial sales figures more than they care about the content of the game itself. Smash could be the worst iteration yet, but as long as it sold Nintendo wouldn't necessarily care. Now, is this the case with Smash 4? I don't believe so.

Nintendo has gone very far in including Smash in E3, bringing over Sakurai for the event, holding tournaments, and encouraging as many people to get their hands on the initial build as possible with the best buy version. What does this mean for a demo? Only time will tell.

They could think that a demo would be great! but with all the time and effort they've put into support and promoting Smash as a flagship title this time, they really don't NEED a demo to sell it anymore. A demo is just as likely to hurt their sales as help it, and if the risk of making a demo means less sales in the long run even by chance, they will not make one.

 

[MajorMajora]

Figured this was somewhat on topic.

 

[Gamecube Kid]

I said before release, and I don't mean at a GameStop of some kind. What main stream Nintendo games got a downloadable demo in the eshop before they were actually released?

Sonic and mario olympics for 3ds did and didn't skyward sword get one too?