Hi, I'm new to this board and to game development in general. Since I have very little time to work on my game, I was wondering if it's a good idea to release a small demo before the game is finished. This way I would know if there's much interest for the game, but I would probably get worse reviews than if I finished the game completely (which will take at least two months). On one hand it might increase the download count before the game is properly released (does this actually matter?), on the other the people who download it before it's released won't buy it. And following on from that, is it better to release a small part of the game and get people to download the whole game when they pay for it, or to release the whole game and just send them keys to unlock it. Is there a file size limit where one becomes more efficient than the other? Btw, the game's mini golf in sort-of-3D. Thanks, Bojan
It's a terrible idea to release before people can buy. I know you want to get your work out there, but you need the player to be able to purchase the full version while they are playing it. A better idea might be to release the beta right here at Indiegamer for people to play and critique. That way, you can get feedback without losing sales. As far as your second question goes, I guess it depends on how big the full version is. If it's big enough to put off the would-be downloader, then it may be better to split it up. If you plan to portal it though, they will want the whole thing anyway....
Personal opinion? Don't bother. #1 - As an artist - if you don't already know that you are going to finish it and that it'll find its market somehow, then don't start. #2 - There's enough of a problem with the Internet being filled with crappy half-finished dreams out there that I wouldn't want to see yet more clutter. #3 - The amount of time and effort it would take to get a GOOD, QUALITY demo of a half-finished game out there could be better spent getting the real game finished, cleaned up, and released. #4 - When I see an unfinished demo on the Internet, I basically figure that it's a project that the original creators abandoned once it got to a certain part, and they just released whatever they had before moving off to do other things. Most of these things NEVER get finished. It just seems unprofessional. #5 - From a business perspective - the point of having a demo out there is to make a sale. If you have players interested and willing to purchase - but you have nothing to sell them - you may just lose the sale entirely. Getting them excited again to buy your game a few months later when you have a new demo and the real version out may be hard - they've already moved on. Now - this is NOT me talking about opening up an alpha or beta test version to the public. I don't have a problem with that at all, and I certainly don't have a problem with you trying to include a bit of a marketing message to your test version. Yeah, it's a fine line - the main difference being the purpose of your release, I guess.
Thanks guys, I'm glad you both feel strongly about the same answer, it means I don't have to think much, I'll just have to finish it to the best of my ability before releasing it. I originally picked it just for fun, and to match with my skills (and most importantly my lack of any artistic skill). I only decided to try shareware (and read Pavlina's articles on picking the right game) half-way through the project. I decided to stick with the game because I want to see how the whole shareware thing works before commiting myself to a new project. I don't expect to earn any serious money from my first game. The thing I am most interested in is seeing how I can influence the number downloads and sales through marketing. Thanks again for the replies, Bojan
But I still think its a good idea to create some kind of hype before releasing a game. When you are able to do that. Famous example: http://www.theycamefromhollywood.com/ I don't know how long people are waiting for this release, but it's been ages.
Note that there's a difference between a "public beta" and a "demo". Beta releases are basically demos but you don't call them as such because the game isn't finished. I think publicly releasing betas makes a lot of sense if you are trying to build some momentum behind your product before the actual rollout. Sitting quietly and releasing no information until your game is released is a waste of good marketing potential. Summary: If you want people to see what you're working on release a 1 level "beta", but don't call it a "demo" unless the full version is available for purchase.
Gish was released without a demo, and I impulse bought it. I wonder how many others did? That's reason enough for me to suggest making the official demo after the full game, but what do I know. Then there was One Must Fall Battlegrounds, which had an early demo. Played that, and didn't need to play the full game.
Releasing a beta could be either good or disastrous. A common trick I have seen is to allow beta testers to purchase the game at a slightly reduced rate, then when the full version is finally released they will still be able to use their key/serial without a problem. Some puzzle games do this mainly to polish up their app, and retreive as much feedback as possible before going final. I have also done it myself with PilesOTiles to customize certain parts of the game. You could post the website on just a few shareware sites to generate a few downloads, then release it to all of them only when you go final. You don't want too many people seeing it if the beta is bad =)