Yes it is.

A demo in the context of video gaming is a promotional excerpt from a game. Where does this ridiculous notion that a demo is something as written in this stupid apologetic article. In video games, a demo is not a prototype or the finished product. It is not an unfinished, unpolished version of the game. It is from a 90%+ complete code base where the only improvements to that code base will be bug fixes or in the extreme case, some loading time improvements.

Why is it I keep reading in the year 2012, stupid idiotic tools making a defense for the crappyness of a demo? "It's from an old build". So what, does an old build of a game suddenly become good.

I just don't get it, were these people who make excuses for crap demos for one of their beloved games the type that put their hands in the fire more than once?

What is the below article's point? Am I missing something, is that supposed to convince a person of average IQ who enjoys video games and didn't like the demo that the game could still be great? Are we that stupid!!?

What is this bullshit!?....

Last week, the DmC: Devil May Cry demo was released on consoles. Although this game was long-awaited by fans and heavely promoted by Capcom, the game has not received too many positive responses. In fact, some fans thought it was so bad, they decided to start bashing the game on forums, via angry emails, through YouTube and any other way they can. Why? What happened to Devil May Cry fans? Is the new Dante really that bad? Or does it have to do with the fact that the game doesn't feel like a genuine Devil May Cry title? So many questions, but in the end...

Let's face it: the title's gameplay as seen in the demo is different than any other Devil May Cry game. The style points aren't really style points, and some users were able to achieve SSS rank in less than 15 seconds on the hardest difficulty. Is this Capcom's fault? Perhaps, but that's why they've released a demo. Now before I go on, I would like to remind you of the definition of a demo. A demo is defined as:

• A demonstration, as of a product or service. (thefreedictonary.com & answers.com)
• A demonstraton of a prototype system. (dictionary.reference.com)
• To demonstrate a product or prototype. A far more effective way of inducing bugs to manifest than any number of test runs, especialy when important people are watching. (definitions.net)
• An early, barely-functional version of a program which can be used for demonstration purposes as long as the operator uses *exactly* the right commands and skirts its numerous bugs, deficiencies, and unimplemented portions. (encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com)
• An example of a product that is not yet ready to be sold. (merriam-webster.com)

The reason I took the liberty of reminding you what it meant was to show you that the demo that was released might not be the end result. Since Capcom has been so wrapped up in their bubble, it doesn't help gamers understand why the game has been recieved so poorly; but we must remember to be objective. Is it possible that Capcom and Ninja Theory are trying to collect fan feedback in order to make it the perfect DmC game? It's not impossible. As gamers and as fans of Devil May Cry, we should give Capcom a break and let them and Ninja Theory work on the game.

So what if Capcom-Unity deleted some posts on their forum? So what if they only retweeted positive comments about the game? What you must remember is this: to delete such comments, they had to read them. This means that the developer as well as the publisher are well aware of the reactions this new installment has created. Besides, this is a new Dante, a new fresh story and a whole different game. Its point wasn't to copy the original Devil May Cry games, but to design a completely new and reveamped game that will set new standards for the genre.

Will the fans support the new Dante to have DmC live through a new gaming era, or will Devil May Cry meet its downfall? In the end, it's up to the fans to decide!

DmC: Devil May Cry is set for release on January 15th in North America.

Well, I know from experience that some demos aren't as polished as their final product. Some demos are even built by a secondary B-Team that split off earlier in development. The result is a demo that may have glitches or lack features that the A-Team hadn't gotten to yet.

For example, I enjoyed the demo for Kings of Amalure, but it was kinda broken. They had fixed a lot of the glitches by the time the game released. I use demos to taste and I use reviews to help inform me before I purchase.

A demo is a part of the game that a company releases to us in an effort to prove the value of their product and convince us to buy it... but we shouldn't judge it? Wtf?

Well i can give you examples. The new XCOM game is quite liked but the demo was less than impressive for game critics and general gaming population. Sometimes it goes the other way too. The demo for Battlefield 3 was so damn crap. Game turned out quite well even if it is not my kind of game.

If the demo doesn't match the quality of the game what is the point in having the demo in the first place? After all, it is a marketing tool designed to convince people to buy the game. Realistically it isn't that much different from a movie trailer and, while there have been several movies I can remember with bad trailers that I really enjoyed, most movie trailers are far better than the actual movie is.

It is fair to argue that someone shouldn't judge a game based on a leaked copy of a beta version of the game, but something that was released by the company to encourage sales is fair game ...

Usually if I enjoy a demo, I end up enjoying the game. The same goes the other way aroumd.

If a company releases a bad quality Demo, what's the point of releasing it!?

Well for multiplayer games the "demo" is just more of a beta testing tool. Mostly used to perform stress test and other things from i've heard. I agree with you that if people don't like the demo there is not much incentive to buy the game. 

The demos for Bravely Default were not representative of the Final Product, per se. It was used as beta testing.

If the demo isn't representing the final product well, the demo should not be released, at all.
Stop blaming the customers.

Correct me if I am wrong, but there was no demo for BF3, it was actually a beta, which is different from a demo.