Pokemon: Let's Go Pikachu and Eevee have been out for a few months now, with plenty of trainers having the chance to experience the Kanto region once more. For those that are still on the fence, however, Nintendo has added a free demo for players to try out. The demo features a tutorial of the game, set in the Viridian Forest, allowing you to capture wild Pokemon and take on a few trainers. The content is the same as the demo that was playable at E3 2018, letting you pick between a party of Charmander, Bulbasaur, Squirtle, both Pikachu and Eevee, and Meowth. While there's no play limit, you can't transfer any data to the final game. If you're interested, it's currently on the Switch eShop, and is about 2.2GB.

Source

 

[Deleted User]

Thanks for the news. Would've been nice if the demo was released before the game was out. 60 USD is a bit too much for this game. Hopefully the next pokemon game isn't gonna hold my hand.

 

[KingVamp]

Agree. While the demo might be fun to try, I doubt it is going change my mind about it. Besides, the other Pokemon game is coming out this year anyway.

 

[MorningBlunt]

Is it a timed DEMO or get past first gym or something?

 

[H1B1Esquire]

a time

Appears to be:
"The demo features a tutorial of the game, set in the Viridian Forest, allowing you to capture wild Pokemon and take on a few trainers. The content is the same as the demo that was playable at E3 2018, letting you pick between a party of Charmander, Bulbasaur, Squirtle, both Pikachu and Eevee, and Meowth. While there's no play limit, you can't transfer any data to the final game."


I hope they give a Gen. 8 demo with transfers.....but I feel if they do, it'll probably be a Melmetal with a "never-before-seen move!" (that Melmetal can't normally learn, but it won't be a "new" move) or an ability, like Battle Bond 'ninja.

 

[The Real Jdbye]

Is it a timed DEMO or get past first gym or something?

Would have been better if it was. This demo doesn't really show what the game is like, it just gives you a feel for the catching mechanics. It might be good for people skeptical about the new mechanics or people new to the series who might have only played Pokemon Go before though.

 

[Foxi4]

Nintendo is hilariously misunderstanding the purpose of a demo, it's a couple months too late. You release demos *before* the retail version, or at the very least you release them concurrently.

 

[Fugelmir]

Remake of gameboy game gets demo.

I might play if it had difficulty settings. Not a fan of a game with 0 challenge.

 

[Maximilious]

I'm hoping I can download the demo for Let's Go Eevee to create a save file, then use that save file to get the Let's Go Eevee Spirit in Smash Bros. And no, this not the same Eevee spirit that you get at the start of the solo campaign. Now that would be great!

 

[swabbo]

Remake of gameboy game gets demo.

I might play if it had difficulty settings. Not a fan of a game with 0 challenge.

I mean there are ways to make it difficult, but you need a hacked console running CFW (shouldn't have to rely on mods to enjoy a game more, but hey-ho)

https://gbatemp.net/threads/pokemon...d-eevee-challenging-romhacks-for-lgpe.523814/

 

[Mama Looigi]

How about a Charizard let’s go?

 

[tech3475]

Nintendo is hilariously misunderstanding the purpose of a demo, it's a couple months too late. You release demos *before* the retail version, or at the very least you release them concurrently.

I vaguely recall other devs/publishers seeing demos as a negative thing either because of the resources required and/or they didn’t think they improved sales (maybe even the opposite).

Nintendo likely saw the launch/xmas period as ‘people will buy it anyway’ with any demo being the above sentiment.

Now that the launch period is over, they may be hoping to boost sales by letting those who may have had little/no interest or were concerned about the gameplay have a go.

 

[lordelan]

Still no Pro Controller update to the actual game. Thanks Nintendo!

 

[digipimp75]

uhh, isn't it customary to release a demo before the game comes out?

 

[blahblah]

No Pro Controller support, no play. Supporting non-waggle control types is not optional. Nintendo stands in contrast to all that is good in this world with their strong headed control scheme mandates.

The polar opposite of what Microsoft is doing with the Xbox Adaptive Controller. The polar opposite of what common sense would dictate.

So you can keep the demo, Nintendo.

 

[Foxi4]

I vaguely recall other devs/publishers seeing demos as a negative thing either because of the resources required and/or they didn’t think they improved sales (maybe even the opposite).

Nintendo likely saw the launch/xmas period as ‘people will buy it anyway’ with any demo being the above sentiment.

Now that the launch period is over, they may be hoping to boost sales by letting those who may have had little/no interest or were concerned about the gameplay have a go.

The accelerated development cycles are at fault here. Back in the day demos were either developed as a separate branch of the project (Fallout 1, for instance) or they were simply a time/level restricted version of the Gold release (contemporary practice). Nowadays betas are more prominent because they allow developers to cut cost on in-house testing. That's neither here nor there though, Nintendo simply didn't see the need to build a demo because the Pokemon brand sells itself and now that the sales have declined after the initial release, they want to turn the heat back up, which is understandable.

 

[blahblah]

The accelerated development cycles are at fault here. Back in the day demos were either developed as a separate branch of the project (Fallout 1, for instance) or they were simply a time/level restricted version of the Gold release (contemporary practice). Nowadays betas are more prominent because they allow developers to cut cost on in-house testing. That's neither here nor there though, Nintendo simply didn't see the need to build a demo because the Pokemon brand sells itself and now that the sales have declined after the initial release, they want to turn the heat back up, which is understandable.

While you are generally correct, stating things that are mostly true, those things are not the issue here.

Nintendo creates demos, ties them to online play & releases them before the game comes out. Then they pull the demo a few days later. The game goes on sale. Months pass. Then they release the same demo again, this time without the online enforced time bomb. This is what they did with ARMS. There's a pattern of Nintendo doing this kind of thing, being unimaginably stingy with demos. It goes back quite some time.

Demos still get created. Builds for media events and public hands on and whatnot. This demo is that, a slice of the game Nintendo used at various events pre-release to market the game.

Back to your point: In the not-too-distant past (last generation) pre-release demos were rarely released to the general public on account of lots of data showing that the availability of a demo actually hurts sales. That calculus has changed this generation, with the advent of the always connected game as a service. Now, the vast majority of AAA titles of note offer a pre-release demo in the form of a fake* beta, offered briefly before release for a limited time span. Once the game has back, that slice of content tends to return as 'always available' demo.

Nintendo is still stuck in that old mode of creating titles that sell once, get played, get put on a shelf. They rely on the long tail rather than the smarter approach of creating a title that evolves over time, consistently being played (and generating revenue) from/by a growing audience. So they operate how others used to operate - creating demos, allowing them to be played at events but rarely releasing them to the broader public. Even judged by that old standard, Nintendo is way stinger than the rest of the industry.

*Offered far too late to have any meaningful impact on game design decisions/non-blocking bugs/etc. Used as a marketing tool and a way to evaluate the backend services, to ensure that they can cope with the demands a real player base places on them.

 

[Foxi4]

While you are generally correct, stating things that are mostly true, those things are not the issue here.

Nintendo creates demos, ties them to online play & releases them before the game comes out. Then they pull the demo a few days later. The game goes on sale. Months pass. Then they release the same demo again, this time without the online enforced time bomb. This is what they did with ARMS. There's a pattern of Nintendo doing this kind of thing, being unimaginably stingy with demos. It goes back quite some time.

Demos still get created. Builds for media events and public hands on and whatnot. This demo is that, a slice of the game Nintendo used at various events pre-release to market the game.

Back to your point: In the not-too-distant past (last generation) pre-release demos were rarely released to the general public on account of lots of data showing that the availability of a demo actually hurts sales. That calculus has changed this generation, with the advent of the always connected game as a service. Now, the vast majority of AAA titles of note offer a pre-release demo in the form of a fake* beta, offered briefly before release for a limited time span. Once the game has back, that slice of content tends to return as 'always available' demo.

Nintendo is still stuck in that old mode of creating titles that sell once, get played, get put on a shelf. They rely on the long tail rather than the smarter approach of creating a title that evolves over time, consistently being played (and generating revenue) from/by a growing audience. So they operate how others used to operate - creating demos, allowing them to be played at events but rarely releasing them to the broader public. Even judged by that old standard, Nintendo is way stinger than the rest of the industry.

*Offered far too late to have any meaningful impact on game design decisions/non-blocking bugs/etc. Used as a marketing tool and a way to evaluate the backend services, to ensure that they can cope with the demands a real player base places on them.

While I can't comment on the efficacy of Nintendo's strategy, they do seem to create blockbusters, so they're doing something right. With that said, I think that their particular approach is unique in the sense that it wouldn't work with any other company. Nintendo fans are die hard, often to the point of outright rejecting other platforms and other games, even if they're objectively better, and they will vocally defend the choices the company makes regardless of whether they're beneficial to the end user or not. Personally I hold the belief that every game should be tied to a demo to enable users to try the product before buying it, and said demo must accurately represent the product. Those demos shouldn't magically vanish after a certain period of time and I lean towards storefronts enforcing that as an overarching rule - the consumer deserves to know what they're buying.

 

[Mythical]

Love me some demos. Means I don't have to prepurchase a game and possibly deal with a return hassle/selling it used.

 

[blahblah]

While I can't comment on the efficacy of Nintendo's strategy, they do seem to create blockbusters, so they're doing something right. With that said, I think that their particular approach is unique in the sense that it wouldn't work with any other company. Nintendo fans are die hard, often to the point of outright rejecting other platforms and other games, even if they're objectively better, and they will vocally defend the choices the company makes regardless of whether they're beneficial to the end user or not. Personally I hold the belief that every game should be tied to a demo to enable users to try the product before buying it, and said demo must accurately represent the product. Those demos shouldn't magically vanish after a certain period of time and I lean towards storefronts enforcing that as an overarching rule - the consumer deserves to know what they're buying.

'Fans' are not really part of the conversation. There is a vast user base out there outside of people who post on video game websites. The thing Nintendo does 'right' is the same thing they do wrong - chasing the mass market at all costs, risking failure as they move further from what the core market wants. That failure has happened quite a bit in their history. One shouldn't forget how dire things were for Nintendo before the Switch came out.