How early is too early for a demo?

[Seacliff]

A demo is a useful way for players to experience a project long before it's release, but at the same time, developers may want feedback before they go too far into developing certain mechanics or writing certain subplots.

As a general rule, I would like to think that what I consider to be the game's first chapter is enough for a demo. However, for more ambitious projects that require a lot of groundwork before I can even get to story progression or dungeon design, it's taking a lot longer than I like before I show my game off.

So I'll split this into categories:
Is it okay for a demo to feature incomplete gameplay mechanics?
For example, a large part of my game's gameplay involves the player has the choice to chose between a wide array of armors and skills early on. Is it acceptable to limit the player from certain gameplay choices early on? Imagine if a demo for Pokemon only allowed you to use one of the available starter Pokemon and only allowed you to catch specific wild Pokemon, for example.

Is it okay for a demo to feature underdeveloped towns?
Or maybe just a singular 'town'. Think of moderate-sized hub, but not all the shops and services are functional yet.

Is it okay for a demo to not feature every available sidequest (compared to what should be available for that portion of the game in the final build)?
I think this one is important because optional content done late, when the party is much stronger, simply isn't fun. Maybe this one speaks for itself, and it depends on the content that is missing, but I do want to hear thoughts on this.

Maybe it's all a double edge sword, and saying 'look forward to x content' can have players be more interested in later releases of the project.

This is obviously being asked just to know how much my own demo should contain, but I also want to hear thoughts on other people who play RPG Maker demos? How much do you expect to see in an RPG Maker demo?

 

[bgillisp]

I think it's fine to have incomplete towns, side quests, and systems as long as you are up front about it. Just tell the players what you are looking for still and that it is a proof of concept demo and those who want to wait until you have the rest done can just watch the thread and wait.

 

[Finnuval]

As @bgillisp says : as long as you are upfront about it and clear that it's a proof-of-concept demo you'll be fine

 

[dulsi]

For a non-commercial game, I'd agree. For something you intend to sell, the demo is part of marketing. You don't want to release it too early so everyone forgets about your game before it is released.

 

[TheoAllen]

That also depends on the goal you're aiming. Is it closed alpha/beta? or is it open beta?
If it's for the public, you may want to make it appealing and make your potential player get hyped.
If it's closed, you may want to only include a (very) specific feature for feedback.

But in my experience, it's just hard to get back to the project that once had a demo, then went full. Especially if the demo contains a long gameplay session. Mainly because of "the old saves will not work so you have to reset your playthrough". So, in my opinion, a public demo might be good if it only contains a small proportion of the game that your player may not mind if they reset the playthrough unless you managed to make the old save files work.

 

[woootbm]

That also depends on the goal you're aiming. Is it closed alpha/beta? or is it open beta?

This is my thinking. I wouldn't call what OP is describing as a "demo". Maybe I'm just old, but generally speaking I think the public expects a "demo" to be a fully functional, bite-size experience to sell the game. What was described in those questions sound more like an "early access" or a "beta" or a "test build". All of which will need some words attached to it so that those who acquire it understand that what they are seeing does not reflect the final state of the game.

 

[Wavelength]

The key to the demo is that it needs to show off the 'WOW' factor of your game. Whatever it is in your game that is going to captivate players and make them view your game as a special experience, make sure to fully develop that element, and surround it with at least an hour of content so that it feels like an appetizing experience rather than a mere tech demo.

If your game's Wow comes from storytelling, make sure to include at least a couple elements of the story that will amaze the player. Don't just show the first hour where the hero wakes up in bed, gathers mushrooms, and come back to find his village burned down. If the Wow comes from twists that you can't reveal without ruining things for the full game, then create an alternate, self-contained plot for the demo, to show off the characters and your writing skills.

If your game's Wow comes from the battle system, create a very battle-heavy demo. Give the characters some dialogue to develop them, of course, but don't bloat your demo with long cutscenes or chores like running around the map. Throw in a lot of boss battles if they're cool (even if they don't necessarily belong in this part of your game). Make sure there are areas the player can grind (without needing to) if they find the battle system really enjoyable. And make sure the battle system feels polished and its mechanics are fully fleshed out, even if the list of abilities, weapons, etc. is still limited.

If your game's Wow comes from a dynamic relationship system with NPCs, create a demo that devotes a lot of time to talking to/spending time with various NPCs, and speed up the pace at which you form bonds with those NPCs so that players can feel the impact of the system over the course of an hour. Go for depth over breadth - better to leave half the characters out than to include them all half-baked.

If your game's Wow comes from a system like monster-breeding, make sure that system is at least almost fully developed (one or two features may be missing, but anything considered "core" to the monster-breeding experience should be there). Any monster you can catch, you should be able to breed. Any monster you find "in the wild", you should be able to catch. But you don't need to include every monster that will be in your final game in the demo - even 20 would be good enough.

And so on.

To answer your specific questions:

Is it okay for a demo to feature incomplete gameplay mechanics?

Incomplete mechanics you want to avoid if possible, but mechanics with limited content is fine. To stick with your example of Pokemon, it would be a sin to allow players to catch Pokemon but not add the mons they catch to their party in a demo. It would be fine to include only a limited selection of mons in the demo, but anything that you "can" catch, you should be able to in the demo. If the designer wanted to include some mons that weren't ready to be added as player-catchable yet, the best way to do that in Pokemon would be putting them in Rival Trainers' lineups.

Is it okay for a demo to feature underdeveloped towns?

Yes, as long as the Wow factor wasn't coming from the towns.

Is it okay for a demo to not feature every available sidequest (compared to what should be available for that portion of the game in the final build)?

Of course that's fine. Sidequests are generally one of the last things developers add to a game.

One other thing I want to mention is that I partially agree with @dulsi when he suggests:

For a non-commercial game, I'd agree. For something you intend to sell, the demo is part of marketing.

I think that it's true that if you're a large studio, you need the demo to be polished and it needs to make your game look great. (I also agree about the non-commercial game bit.) However, if you're a small indie studio with plans to release your game commercially, all you need the demo to do is drum up interest for your game, even if it lacks polish and doesn't make people objectively think the whole game looks great right now. If you can at least deliver the wow factor, people will be intrigued; they will start following your game. And in the long run that will equate to higher sales for a small indie dev.

 

[bgillisp]

One thing I'd like to point out is if you are a first time game maker, you need to get that demo out as soon as possible for feedback. The reason is most of us honestly are learning how to make a game as we go, and we need others to rip the demo to shreds so that we can learn what we did that works, and doesn't work.

For example, my game I entered in the 2014 IGMC. I got feedback from 6 people in the end, 3 positive and 3 negative. But I was able to look at trends in that feedback to see what I needed to fix up in my game. For instance, I originally didn't think about size of house insides when I first made the game, until about every person commented on the 90 x 90 house interior I had in that demo. In hindsight it was a bad idea to make it that big, but when starting out those kind of things you might not notice until someone else points it out to you. I also had scenes in my demo that were more introduce the characters, but some commented that they were nice, but what was the point to that scene? So I looked to see if I could combine it, and managed to condense things down some so that the start of the game didn't feel very slow.

Now if you are not releasing your first game, an early demo is probably not as needed as the hope is you have learned enough to already know what is or isn't going to work. But if you are testing a new concept there might still be a place for it. For example. let's say you get an idea for a battle system that you wish to test. It is better to test it early in development when you've only invested a month or two into it vs late in the development stage when you have spent 4 years fine tuning it, as at that point if you learn that no one likes the system and it needs an overhaul you're likely going to have to just live with it anyways if you ever want to release the game.