This is very true, but it seems you are assuming a general audience for the demo. Indeed in such a case a demo of a turn based game such as this may not be captivating enough. But here the case is different, no casual gamer visits Matrix, but rather people who play "hardcore" wargames. Their view of the demo would be in terms of comparing it to rather products, which develop at the same, slow pace. Maybe I'm wrong but I think this would work, after playing one scenario in this game I was able to tell if I like it or not.
I don't think he's assuming this at all...in fact, it would have to be assumed that their research would indeed cover "hardcore" wargamers as well as "light" wargamers, otherwise the research wouldn't be worth much.
Further, I believe their research is right on the money...I downloaded the demo for Command Ops: Battles from the Bulge, and since I couldn't get into the flow of it in the 15 minutes I sat there trying to learn it (even with the tutorial, etc.), I passed on it. Two thoughts:
1. If I had paid the money for the game, you're damn right I'd have spent more time trying to figure it out.
2. Notwithstanding my decision not to buy, I don't think making a demo for this particular game (Battles from the Bulge) was a bad idea. It's a very different kind of wargame, and prospective buyers need to be able to check that out.
All in all, I have absolutely no problem with companies not putting out demos...yes, in some cases it gets you to buy, but in others it doesn't. For Decisive Campaigns, I do not feel a demo is needed. This game is being discussed ad naseum on these forums...there's screen shots, AAR's, a detailed combat example, GREAT input from the creator of the game, comparisons to other games, etc., etc. I believe there is enough there to help anyone make a decision about it.