Would You Like A Demo Available For Attila

[LestaT]

Would you like to have a demo available regardless whether you are going to preorder or not ?

[Makrell]

if there is a demo available i will most likely preorder the game, unless the game is broken.

So yes, i want a demo

[ariyan]

I'm waiting for this,so yes .

[GussieFinkNottle]

Very definitely. Even better, a public beta, ensuring quality control and perhaps actually tempting me to preorder.

[zackstefy]

Yep. Why? Because I need to know if the game is optimized or not, Frankenstein 2 was a complete disaster first ( now is a lil' better) .
If there will be a demo, it will be scripted, but still it will be enogh for us to make an idea about the game

[Abdülmecid I]

I find the poll unnecessary. Why whouldn't anybody want a demo for a game?

[Praetorian_BGX]

I find the poll unnecessary. Why whouldn't anybody want a demo for a game?

I find your post unnecessary.

[LestaT]

I find the poll unnecessary. Why whouldn't anybody want a demo for a game?

Marketing research reason.

In any case there may be people who don't want a demo because they wont be buying the game whatever comes or even don't want it because dome does not most of the time represent the actual state of the game. There might be people also who would choose 'Don't Care' because they don't really care anymore for the series but still here on TWC because there are no other better place to be.

[RGA]

Actually, I don't really care much about a demo. After all, what could a demo offer? A single playable batte? We all know that Attila's battle won't be much different from Rome 2, beside new units and factions. I don't think they will have the same problems with unit blobbing or siege AI as the case of Rome 2's release. On the other hand, I doubt much that naval battles are fixed (I would be happy to be wrong).

A mini campaign, perhaps tutorial campaign, would be more revealing. But most problems come from newly implemented features and how they react with existing system. Tutorial campaign is too limited in scope to reveal such issues. We could only tell after spend like 100 turns in the Grand campaign.

Another concern is optimization. Well. to be honest, it is (sadly) almost the norm nowadays in gaming industry that newly released games are poorly optimized until several patches later. My computer runs Rome 2 Emperor Edititon almost double as fast as Rome 2 on release. In this regard, CA actually holds good reputation, as they almost never drop support for their bad games and go on developing something new (only exception is arguably Empire).

Would I care enough to download 10GB of demo? I don't think so. I would rather wait for the reviews in forums.

[Garensterz]

All games must automatically have a demo before release! This should be a policy for all gaming industries.

[gyabo]

Totally wish all games should have demo!! Especially some indie/ kickstarter games. It really a shame CA came to this!! A big developer which release alpha patch and still got a balls to ask money.

Thank you SegaHopefully you will not become a monster like EA

[Sheridan]

If it is a good product, then surely they should have no worries about releasing a demo. Shogun 2 had a demo and it was a great introduction to the game, showcasing some cool battles but also a small portion of the campaign. It's a bit silly to market your product as "the best so far" and then not release a demo for it - I'm looking at you, Rome II. That's the kind of move that makes you wonder if it is in fact so good as claimed.

[Finlander]

The demo for Medieval 2 consisted solely of one battle which was heavily scripted if my memory serves me right. Demos alone doesn't necessary show much at all about the functionality of the game and sometimes they can be very misleading for the consumer and can lead to a dissapointment if the complete game is something very differend. I'd say better information can be gathered by watching actual gameplay videos of the released game before purchasing it than by spending a moment getting familiar with the demo.

I am also very lazy person to test demos even if the developer offered one. I tend to use other sources before making the purchasing decision anyway so it is not like I am buying a pig in a poke. Personally I don't care at all if there was a demo or not for any game, Attila included.

[Anna_Gein]

There was three historical battles in M2TW demo. I am sure of it. I think some battles and the campaign tutorial is enough content for a demo. A large part of its purpose is to see how much optimized the game is and if how the game run on your machine. Given how R2 or ETW were I understand why CA won't give a demo. Even the spec given are jokes/lies.

[Epic28]

Given how R2 or ETW were I understand why CA won't give a demo. Even the spec given are jokes/lies.

Even Empire released a demo before the game came out. Battle of Brandywine Creek.

Can you image how many people would of cancelled preorders if a Rome 2 demo was released for the largest financial budget in TW history and this is what users experienced?




Our faces woulda been like...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[LestaT]

Can you image how many people would of cancelled preorders if a Rome 2 demo was released for the largest financial budget in TW history and this is what users experienced?

If demo was released for Rome II featuring a portion of the Tutoria campaign (which is basically like Shogun 2 demo) I'm pretty sure the preorder for Rome II will be higher.

[Totalheadache]

The demo for Medieval 2 consisted solely of one battle which was heavily scripted if my memory serves me right. Demos alone doesn't necessary show much at all about the functionality of the game and sometimes they can be very misleading for the consumer and can lead to a dissapointment if the complete game is something very differend. I'd say better information can be gathered by watching actual gameplay videos of the released game before purchasing it than by spending a moment getting familiar with the demo.

I am also very lazy person to test demos even if the developer offered one. I tend to use other sources before making the purchasing decision anyway so it is not like I am buying a pig in a poke. Personally I don't care at all if there was a demo or not for any game, Attila included.

or how about if you cant produce a quality demo for the game what does that say about the end product.

and yes gameplay videos are ok but then whats the source and the rig used etc? and moreover I tend to remember actual gameplay vids pre Rome 2 very thin on the ground.

in fact the one they did show was a farce in terms of exploding fireballs etc...

p.s there was no demo for dragon age inquisition but loads of in-game footage. will we see the same re Atilla....I doubt it..in fact i'd be willing to make a bet with anyone to that effect..(same goes for farcry4)

[Thrasymachus]

Demos are pretty useless because they can be representative of the full game as well as misleading. A developer who has made a good game will release an honest demo and a developer who hasn't will try to release a misleading one, a demo that creates a false image of the game. As a result, you cannot trust a demo at all. Sure, it is necessary at least the code of the demo to be well written, so you need to have done something right as a developer, but who says that the parts of the game that are not presented in the demo will be of the same quality?

[GideonAI]

I want to play a demo before I buy a game.

[Butan]

A demo never hurts (except the developers budget/agenda), and retrospectively speaking it is in very high demand for Total Wars, until they release quality games again.