Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

THQ AŞ Message Board

  • kkingtutttm kkingtutttm Mar 3, 2011 7:03 AM Flag

    200,000 Homefront Pre-orders U.S.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I personally think that the player would miss too many fine points with a demo. There are going to plots, characters, vehicles, weapons, etc. that won't even be seen in the first 30 minutes.

      I don't disagree with a lot of your logic. My opinion, they should not have a demo. Based on your logic, they may put one out of the first 30 minutes or so once the game is out. That is when they can re-direct resources to putting it together.

      I think I watched an interview of someone at Kaos and the guy said everyone there is completely dedicated to making the game solid and they didn't want to lose that focus by working on a demo.

    • "No, actually I think it is a red flag with a white circle with a red star inside."

      Bio-degradable, I hope.

    • "Isn't that a red flag?"

      No, actually I think it is a red flag with a white circle with a red star inside.

      Home is where the War is.

    • "Demo's are for games with no story."

      That is ridiculous. There is no reason a game with a story can't have a demo of its first half hour or so. That sure helped Bioshock 1. It gets people interested to find out more. From Wikipedia:

      The demo contains parts of the first level of the game and includes a cinematic opening sequence that established the setting and initial plot lines, and the tutorial phase of the game. The demo also contained some differences from the release version such as an extra plasmid and weapons, alongside an earlier security system presence. These were introduced to give players access to several features of the full game. In nine days, the BioShock demo outperformed every other demo release on Xbox Live and became the fastest demo to reach one million downloads.

    • I think you are missing the whole point of THQ's strategy. Their goal has always been to immerse the player into the story and feel it emotionally. They want the players to have a reason to fight and understand the background of the premise of the game. They have spent years developing this and making sure they get it right. Their marketing campaign is focused completely on getting gamers into the story before the gameplay even begins.

      A demo ruins all of this and it would take a tremendous effort to sell the story in a demo. The game is 50% story and 50% gameplay. A demo ruins the story side of it and could possibly turn some shortsighted people away. Besides, why invest money and resources into putting together a demo when it isn't necessary. Use those resources on improving the game. Let the games sell itself.

      The fact remains that the feedback from gamers and solid reviews is what will sell the game long term and this plays into their marketing strategy more than a demo. Demo's are for games with no story. Homefront has an amazing story and it doesn't need to be ruined.

    • srayma78@sbcglobal.net srayma78 Mar 3, 2011 10:32 AM Flag

      Orion-

      100% dead on. Doesn't matter though because as you can see now it's about perception and despite Jester knowing that what you posted has and was the "excuse" THQ/Kaos gave he can post an old tweet from last October from Danny Bilson and make the Company look incompetent and the game look like it's "hiding" something. Surprised he just didn't say it was Kaos purposely doing it because of morale issues!

      All in due time as it's now a mere 12 days until release and the scores will be here.

    • "A demo version would have taken time away from them focusing on the actual product."

      They provide demos for journalists and presumably for GDC? An MP demo might be more time consuming to manage, but an SP demo could be put out tomorrow for almost no cost, surely?

      "I think they just really ran out of time and resources"

      Isn't that a red flag?

    • If you search more - you may find (what I believe) is - they wanted to focus their limited time and resources on perfecting the game.

      A demo version would have taken time away from them focusing on the actual product.

      I think they just really ran out of time and resources and had to make a tough decision.

      If push came to shove, I believe I would have voted in favor of making the best game possible (right out of the box) in lieu of a demo.

      HOWEVER - I do agree, a great demo would have been ideal.

      We will have to see how this one plays out.

    • IMO they intended to release a demo then changed their mind. Perhaps they saw what happened with Crysis 2, where its recent MP demo wasn't impressive and pre-orders have probably suffered as a result. If it's a great game, like 90+ reviews, and they previously intended to let people see it, why then choose to keep it hidden? Unless... maybe it isn't a 90's game? Movie studios do this thing where they try to manufacture a strong opening weekend while holding back demo screenings for reviewers.

    • Does anyone remember the conversation during the first UFC game release a few years back - someone mentioned that first day or maybe it was first week sell through was usually 3X pre-order sales.

      Does anyone have any decent statistics that back this up or does this even apply anymore - since this was a few years ago.

    • View More Messages