Arcade Berg Game Designer

The purpose of a game demo?

[I'm writing this the last, after reading my post. It suppose this post is just as much about allowing different approaches to challenges in games, like in Deus Ex or Fallout, as it is about what to think about when releasing a demo. Well, I still hope you can find something here of interest.]

A few days ago, a playable demo of the game Batman - Arkham Asylum was released. It is the best demo I've tried in a very long time.

I'm not saying that simply because I think it's fun, but partly because it makes me THINK the complete game is, without actually knowing.

In the commercial industry, a game demo has one purpose; to get people to buy the game. But for many indie developers, that's not necessarily true. I might be, but it's not a necessity.

An indie developer might release a demo to show the world how fun of a game he can make and leave it at that.

I'm wondering, what approach should one take when creating a demo. Should they differ between when trying to sell and when just trying to show your stuff?

1. Should you show a lot or just a small part of what the game can offer regarding gameplay?
2. Since it's a demo, should we tell the player "This is what you can do", or should we risk it and let them find it out by themselves?
3. Should we try and deliver "the complete demo experience" with one play-through, or require several ones?

I don't know the answers for these questions, but I intend to discuss them. I'll discuss them one at a time to finally compare it to the Batman demo, trying to give an example where it works. And of course, these are just my opinions, so think of them as you wish.

1. Should you show a lot or just a small part of what the game can offer regarding gameplay?

Personally, I think, especially for commercial purposes that you shouldn't give it all away. It's hard, but it's better to give the player some tools to play with yet hint, that it's only a part of a grander plan that comes with the complete product.

An indie might feel differently, since it's perhaps not likely that "anyone" will buy the game (if sold) but the indie dev still wants to show the player a fantastic product.

All I "need" to experience in a demo is the basic gameplay and what kind of additional mechanics they add up on it. Are there power ups in the game? Then at least let me try one or two, but don't give them all away. Are there very different enemies in the game? Then let me try and fight at least a couple.

This is hard for indies and some industry companies, because one wants to show how clever one is.

2. Since it's a demo, should we tell the player "This is what you can do", or should we risk it and let them find it out by themselves?

This is a tough one. Players are likely to be willing to spend less time and effort with a free demo than with a complete game he paid money for. By clearly telling the player what's possible to do in the demo, we can be sure that all players get a chance to experience it. Experience the game "as good as it can be". However(!), the problem is that we lose the sense of achievement a player feels when discovering things. I'll discuss this exact example in Batman later.

I think this boils down to a risk vs. reward scenario actually. Do you dare to to risk the player not finding out some stuff that might have the player love the game. Things that if you tell the player about, he might not feel so excited about? The greater the risk, the greater the reward.

3. Should we try and deliver "the complete demo experience" with one play-through, or require several ones?

Since a demo is often short, it doesn't require much time from the player for him to play it once again. But, then again, why would the player spend that amount of time playing nothing but a demo after already having established an opinion towards the product? I think that if the first play-through is good, of course, the player is more willing to play it again.

How do you make the first play-through good and the second one even better? By "saving things" for the second run, don't you then make the first one less good? Not necessarily. I can't give a straight answer as to how to solve this, but I personally think it's about playing on the psychological parts of a player and not just quantifying the gameplay in a game.

What about Batman?

As I said, I think the Batman - Arkham Asylum demo was great.

Not only because it was fun to play, but because it makes me think that the entire game is even more fun!

It started out, giving me the basics of fighting using swift strikes and counters. Before the demo had ended, the game had also taught me some other moves like gliding in the air, sneaking and beating downed enemies. This all by itself was a lot of fun.

I got to try out the Batarang, a piece of special equipment and I got to use a grappling hook.

So, all in all I got to try out an array of moves and equipments, but I still know there are way more to go. I can't imagine all the cool stuff Batman got in his Bat-belt and I really want to try them out! They could have given me so much more, but there was no need and I guess the developers thought so too.

Now, for the what the game tells you. As I said, the game taught me a handful of moves and tips, and that's pretty much what I used for my first play-through, using a quite brutish strategy to finish of the enemies in the last room of the demo. I glide kicked, swung around, jumping down and beating the enemies. It worked fine, but it really lacked finesse. Still, I enjoyed it, thanks to gameplay.

But while playing, even if the game told me to glide kick, I noticed I could just hang from the gargoyle I was sitting on. Instead of sneaking up on enemies, I noticed I could stun them with my (awesome!) Batarang. The game didn't tell me this, but I figured it out anyway.

What's good about this is, that even without discovering some of these things, there's still enough to do for you to be greatly entertained. Hence, I think they struck a good balance between how much they shoved up my face, and how much they'd let me find out.

Afterwards I shut the game down and this is when the interesting stuff happened. I started thinking about how I've handled the scenarios in the game. I got a set of tools (moves, items, abilities, environment) and the game offers a set of obstacles. I started thinking, what if I'd used some other "tools". What if this, what if that. Maybe I could have, and maybe it'd be cool to.

It kept popping up at the back of my mind, so the next day I started the demo again. And let me tell you, I enjoyed the game even more this time!

Last time, as I said, in the final room, I just used brute force to beat it. But this time, being more familiar with my tools.

What happened:

I snuck up on the first enemy from behind, performing a silent take-down. Afterwards I swung up to a gargoyle, making it to the other side of the room without being noticed. From there I swung down from my gargoyle, grabbing an enemy, taking him up with me again, releasing him making him fall down a great height, while being tied to a rope.

I then immediately swung to another gargoyle while two other enemies ran towards to hanging one, to help him out. Once they'd arrived I stunned one of them with a Batarang-throw, immediately followed by a glide kick from high up on the other one. After this I quickly followed up with two take down moves, beating them both unconscious before they even saw me.

Once I'd taken care of those three, I could easily ambush the last one, since he had no one to help him out.

This play-through, I WAS Batman!

This, for one shows that I like the game, but more importantly, it shows how it's layered and how a short demo, only lasting a few minutes, can show off such a big part of the game.

Conclusion

It's a very long text for a very short conclusion. Great care should be put into creating a game demo. It's not just about taking a piece of the full version and having it as a stand alone. Love is required.

Of course, for a demo to be great, the chance of that happening is greatly increased if the full game actual is too.