Surprising Facts/Statistics About Video Gamers
-
Vexer1
- Posts: 883
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
Surprising Facts/Statistics About Video Gamers
Gentlegamer-I find that to be an overly broad stereotype that has very little basis in reality.
-
pacguy191
- Posts: 201
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
Surprising Facts/Statistics About Video Gamers
Is it just me or is that picture nothing more than a good joke?
Oh that's right, it's the internet. You're not allowed to joke.
I've held off on responding to this thread but really, why is this still a debate? Yes, women gamers exist. Men are still a decent majority. Is it evening out? I don't know, and frankly I don't care. Gaming is getting turned into this social justice debate about how women are getting objectified or aren't getting equally represented and it's offputting. It just sounds like people want something to complain about.
Oh that's right, it's the internet. You're not allowed to joke.
I've held off on responding to this thread but really, why is this still a debate? Yes, women gamers exist. Men are still a decent majority. Is it evening out? I don't know, and frankly I don't care. Gaming is getting turned into this social justice debate about how women are getting objectified or aren't getting equally represented and it's offputting. It just sounds like people want something to complain about.
-
Atarifever1
- Posts: 3892
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
Surprising Facts/Statistics About Video Gamers
pacguy19 wrote: I've held off on responding to this thread but really, why is this still a debate? Yes, women gamers exist. Men are still a decent majority.
And I'm not arguing this isn't the case, but where are you all getting this information? What stat are you quoting here? What study?
"Because everyone knows it" is the reason kids are getting measles again because "everyone knows vaccines cause autism" because a stripper said so and then she wrote a book and then kids are going to freaking die.
"Because everyone knows it" is why going on Facebook is like finding out all your family failed kindergarten and don't know the difference between a "study" and a white supremacist site.
I not only don't like "because everyone knows;" I abhor it.
-
pacguy191
- Posts: 201
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
Surprising Facts/Statistics About Video Gamers
When did I ever say it was common knowledge? I was gonna find some stats but of course they all include casual games, which again, don't make you a gamer. Gamers have Steam accounts, or own some form of game console and play actual games on it. An iPhone does not count as a game console, hence why the people who exclusively play on it aren't gamers.
Everyone missed the actual point of what I posted in that debating crap like this ruins gaming. We can't just play, we have to debate whether or not women are being treated equally first. There have been female protagonists since Metroid, and yet you still hear the rallying cry that women aren't as represented or they're all presented as too sexy and not strong enough. It's annoying.
Women aren't as represented? Make your own games representing them. You can't expect EA or Infinity Ward to do it, they obviously won't. If someone isn't that dedicated to the issue, they just want to complain and I shouldn't care.
Everyone missed the actual point of what I posted in that debating crap like this ruins gaming. We can't just play, we have to debate whether or not women are being treated equally first. There have been female protagonists since Metroid, and yet you still hear the rallying cry that women aren't as represented or they're all presented as too sexy and not strong enough. It's annoying.
Women aren't as represented? Make your own games representing them. You can't expect EA or Infinity Ward to do it, they obviously won't. If someone isn't that dedicated to the issue, they just want to complain and I shouldn't care.
-
LoganRuckman1
- Posts: 329
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
Surprising Facts/Statistics About Video Gamers
scotland17 wrote: That is a fallacy of relative privation...If you are going to argue statistics, understanding both statistics and arguments is helpful.
I wasn't trying to justify what I was saying by giving something worse, I was just making a joke at Ban Bossy's expense.
Also, I remember you criticized my use of anecdotal evidence. Why, though? Isn't it better to use real life examples?
Also, I agree with Atarifever. If mobile gaming is driving the industry, as most people claim, and it's mostly women playing those games, then wouldn't it stand to reason that men DON'T drive the industry. That men AREN'T the dominant demographic anymore. If anything, if this is the case, then it's women who drive the industry nowadays. As I've said before, it doesn't matter how you play it, a game is a game, no matter what. Whether it's a big budget FPS like Call Of Duty or Farmville on Facebook, games are games. It is elitist to suggest that games like Farmville and Angry Birds aren't real games and that the people who play them are irrelevant.
-
Vexer1
- Posts: 883
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
Surprising Facts/Statistics About Video Gamers
pacguy19-No, this is not "crap" at all and it does not "ruin" gaming, that's nonsense. Macho idiot gamers making homophobic/misogynist/sexist comments all the time is what ruins gaming.You're posts are what's truly annoying.People SHOULD care about this, it's important and should not just be ignored and dismissed, and if you can't see that, then I feel sorry for you.
-
scotland171
- Posts: 816
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
Surprising Facts/Statistics About Video Gamers
@ LoganRuckman - Thanks for reply, Logan. I am watching the Kentucky Derby, and typed out a monologue. Bear with me.
First, jokes are fine, but since all we have are typed words, its easy to read the comment as trying to redirect the conversation to some other controversial topic instead of resolving the conversation.
As for anecdotal evidence, yes, its one of many ways we get to know thing. If you dislike the taste of bourbon, you probably won't like mint juleps. They are very limited though. Anecdotal evidence is just your experience, and your recall of those experiences, and it can always be rebutted by someone else's contrary anecdote. Worse, it can filter incoming information, like if you come off a bad relationship, and are wary of [men/women] for a time.
Other ways are dramatic examples that make headlines, but spark reactions far in excess of what is warranted. For instance in the United States, about 35 thousand people die each year in car accidents, but it gets little attention compared to the relatively few deaths by something like terrorism. Not that terrorism is not real or horrible, but maybe we would react stronger to things like texting while driving.
Better ways still are thorough case studies, focus groups, or panels of experts. Those are good for many things, like clinical trials or marketing research, and may be useful here too. They can have serious issues though. For instance, a few years ago there was a sniper in the Washington DC area. The experts came up with lots of characteristics of the sniper, and were completely wrong on many accounts, so wrong that the actual snipers were stopped at checkpoints by police but let go because they did not meet the profile.
A fine way, perhaps the best way, to know things about a large group of things is with scientifically designed (read: statistical) design of experiments or surveys (or a complete census). Since we don't run experiments on people (usually), we are left observing them. That is still fraught with peril - how were people selected, how many responded, how was the information reviewed or adjusted, what questions were asked, in what order, how was that information collected, what about people hard to find with that method, etc. In this case, one of the big questions is how were the key terms (in particular 'gamer') defined. That's vital. Whatever the definition, if its reasonable, that's fine, but if there is another reasonable definition that would result in different results, that makes it important.
As an example, the National Crime Victimization Survey, a very professional US governmental survey, estimates 3.3 million people in the US were stalked in a recent year. You can find it here http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svus_rev.pdf complete with details on the methodology. However, that number is so *huge* you should not believe it without asking questions. They define stalking very broadly, and count someone as being stalked by saying if you have experienced several of a set of experiences, you have been stalked - not that you self identify as having been stalked. (in fact, only about half of those the study says were stalked agree they were stalked) They still come up with a very small percentage of population, which is part of the problem, but multiply a small percentage by the population of the US, and you get a highly suspect number.
My long winded point (sorry for that) is that even a very thoroughly described, scientific, reputable survey can produce questionable results, so why in the world give credence to an a poorly described survey by a lobbying organization with an axe to grind. Anecdotes make for fine friendly conversation, and I'm happy to talk about female gamer we know, but its not moving the discussion forward on how numerous or important those female gamer are to the hobby and the industry. What would be nice if it companies divulged some of their proprietary information, since they probably have information about that as it affects their profits.
First, jokes are fine, but since all we have are typed words, its easy to read the comment as trying to redirect the conversation to some other controversial topic instead of resolving the conversation.
As for anecdotal evidence, yes, its one of many ways we get to know thing. If you dislike the taste of bourbon, you probably won't like mint juleps. They are very limited though. Anecdotal evidence is just your experience, and your recall of those experiences, and it can always be rebutted by someone else's contrary anecdote. Worse, it can filter incoming information, like if you come off a bad relationship, and are wary of [men/women] for a time.
Other ways are dramatic examples that make headlines, but spark reactions far in excess of what is warranted. For instance in the United States, about 35 thousand people die each year in car accidents, but it gets little attention compared to the relatively few deaths by something like terrorism. Not that terrorism is not real or horrible, but maybe we would react stronger to things like texting while driving.
Better ways still are thorough case studies, focus groups, or panels of experts. Those are good for many things, like clinical trials or marketing research, and may be useful here too. They can have serious issues though. For instance, a few years ago there was a sniper in the Washington DC area. The experts came up with lots of characteristics of the sniper, and were completely wrong on many accounts, so wrong that the actual snipers were stopped at checkpoints by police but let go because they did not meet the profile.
A fine way, perhaps the best way, to know things about a large group of things is with scientifically designed (read: statistical) design of experiments or surveys (or a complete census). Since we don't run experiments on people (usually), we are left observing them. That is still fraught with peril - how were people selected, how many responded, how was the information reviewed or adjusted, what questions were asked, in what order, how was that information collected, what about people hard to find with that method, etc. In this case, one of the big questions is how were the key terms (in particular 'gamer') defined. That's vital. Whatever the definition, if its reasonable, that's fine, but if there is another reasonable definition that would result in different results, that makes it important.
As an example, the National Crime Victimization Survey, a very professional US governmental survey, estimates 3.3 million people in the US were stalked in a recent year. You can find it here http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svus_rev.pdf complete with details on the methodology. However, that number is so *huge* you should not believe it without asking questions. They define stalking very broadly, and count someone as being stalked by saying if you have experienced several of a set of experiences, you have been stalked - not that you self identify as having been stalked. (in fact, only about half of those the study says were stalked agree they were stalked) They still come up with a very small percentage of population, which is part of the problem, but multiply a small percentage by the population of the US, and you get a highly suspect number.
My long winded point (sorry for that) is that even a very thoroughly described, scientific, reputable survey can produce questionable results, so why in the world give credence to an a poorly described survey by a lobbying organization with an axe to grind. Anecdotes make for fine friendly conversation, and I'm happy to talk about female gamer we know, but its not moving the discussion forward on how numerous or important those female gamer are to the hobby and the industry. What would be nice if it companies divulged some of their proprietary information, since they probably have information about that as it affects their profits.
-
scotland
- Posts: 2561
- Joined: April 7th, 2015, 7:33 pm
Re: Surprising Facts/Statistics About Video Gamers
The ESA has released their 2016 report - every couple of years we seem to get into opposing polemics about it.
http://essentialfacts.theesa.com/Essential-Facts-2016.pdf
Be careful how you interpret it, as this thread discusses there are issues in accounting for digital distribution, that the ESA has a vested interest in promoting investment and optimism in the industry (they own and operate E3 and lobby for video game industry interests), etc.
Match it up to the original post made about the 2010 statistics, and they are almost identical. Despite highlighting age and gender data that goes against the 'young male gamer', notice that there is not data saying that is where the gaming hours and dollars are coming from.
Best selling games of 2015 were Call of Duty: Black Ops III, Madden NFL 16, and Fallout 4. "Shooters" are the most popular "Super Genre" (followed by "Action" - together they account for 50% of all games by units sold)
Check it out, see what you think.
http://essentialfacts.theesa.com/Essential-Facts-2016.pdf
Be careful how you interpret it, as this thread discusses there are issues in accounting for digital distribution, that the ESA has a vested interest in promoting investment and optimism in the industry (they own and operate E3 and lobby for video game industry interests), etc.
Match it up to the original post made about the 2010 statistics, and they are almost identical. Despite highlighting age and gender data that goes against the 'young male gamer', notice that there is not data saying that is where the gaming hours and dollars are coming from.
Best selling games of 2015 were Call of Duty: Black Ops III, Madden NFL 16, and Fallout 4. "Shooters" are the most popular "Super Genre" (followed by "Action" - together they account for 50% of all games by units sold)
Check it out, see what you think.
Return to “Video Games General”