Slashdot Mirror
Videogames Attract More Women Than Boys?
Thanks to Yahoo!/Reuters for their story about a new Entertainment Software Association poll showing the demographics of gaming. According to the poll, "...26 percent of game players are women 18 or older, while 21 percent are boys 6 to 17", and the survey also revealed that "...the average gamer spends 6.5 hours a week playing games... while boys 6 to 17 average 7.3 hours per week of game time." Explicit games are also on the increase, as "13.2 percent carried a "Mature" or "M" rating, up from 9.9 percent in 2001 and under 8 percent in 2000."
I wonder what the percentage is for first person shooters? Maybe what is really happening is that game makers are shifting to accomodate a new audience.
Men on the other hand like violent games like Quake. Not that women do not play these kinds of games but being masculine and outdoing each other does not appeal to them as much.
http://saveie6.com/
If you are going to lump all women over the age of 18 together and compare that to middle school and high school boys, I guess you could say that the numbers add up in favor of the disproportionately large population.
is it possible that older females (18+) can afford more games/machines than those poor boys? imagine how hard a 6-year-old boy has to beg to get a game?
additionally, i would imagine younger children won't be too excited about reporting their game-playing activities since most of them are more or less restricted by their parents.
If they're including on-line play of board games, bingo, and the like, then I'm not at all surprised. Old folks playing scrabble and bingo on the net vastly outweigh us young'ns.
Actually, I was trying to be Insightful, not Funny.
Does this mean that 21% are actually female, or that 21% identify themselves as female when playing online games? I suspect the latter. Polls based on a self-selecting group of individuals are never valid.
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Yeah, your gut instinct is probably more reliable than a poll that is merely based on actual research data.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
How does this mean there are more boys playing games than girls? The post is comparing two different age brackets.
more women over 18 than young boys are playing games
This means there is a higher % of women from 18 to ~80 playing games than boys 6 to 17. Well duh... there is a hell of a lot more people in the latter age bracket. Completely stupid stats.
I.O.U One Sig.
Who writes this stuff? Do people read more than just the headlines anymore?
I believe the headline compares "women" and "boys." Not "women" and "men." It is a long believed notion that videogame players are "little boys playing mario in the basement." The point is that times have changed. No longer are girls given "Barbie sidescroller junk" games. The sims and more are starting to appeal to them.
In addition, the main group of gamers is getting older. People who were teens or so when Nintendo, Atari, Commodore came out are grown up now. And you can look at the way game focuses have changed as a result (the successful platforms (PS2 and XBox) are the ones catering to older guys: more violence, mayhem, etc). On the other hand, consoles like Nintendo are pointed towards the same audience (and this is probably where women are playing most). I guess I've gone off on a tangent though, so I'll stop now. My point is that, to answer your question, yes, people read the headlines.
And what proportion of those included the occasional(OK, seven and a half hours during the week) game of solitaire, tetris, and spider?
I wonder if the stipulation of FPS, RPG or RTS playing were made, would the figure be quite so high, it would be nice to see the types of games each demography were playing.
Indeed how was the poll conducted, whether it was taken at game shops, or merely random questioning?
Why is this so suprising? Who has more disposible income? A 12 year old boy, or a 21 year old girl? While it's not the stereotype, I think it makes plenty of sense if you think about it.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
The number of 18+ women is growing and is more than at least 59% of the market. Ok so "women" outnumber "boys". But boys still play longer than the average gamer and they don't go into it, but I suspect they probably buy more games per capita.
I also wonder how skewed their info on Mature games is since probably a significant part of those sales are those Vice City. Actually, are they just going by who hands (a father buying a game for his daughter) over the money or who the game is for (the daughter)?
What is music when you despise all sound?
No wonder it makes no fucking sense. Here it is revised:
The number of 18+ women is growing and is more than 18- boys (21%) but the largest demographic is still 18+ men (38%). So that means males represent at least 59% of the market. Ok so "women" outnumber "boys". But boys still play longer than the average gamer and they don't go into it, but I suspect they probably buy more games per capita.
I also wonder how skewed their info on Mature games is since probably a significant part of those sales are those 18- year old boys getting their older brothers/parents to buy them Vice City. Actually, are they just going by who hands (a father buying a game for his daughter) over the money or who the game is for (the daughter)?
What is music when you despise all sound?
Are you kidding me? I know some women in their 20s and 30s who I've worked with (I'm a programmer) whose whole life revolves around video games.
Try going to the mall, go to the games stores and talk to a few female clerks. You'll find the type I mean without that much trouble. (Might take more than one visit, but you'll meet one.)
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
The real question is why does the ratio between males and females close as women get older? I would say there are two reasons:
--
Luck is just skill you didn't know you had.
Do they include online games like pogo.com? I don't care what you say, something bejeweled and bingo are not true "games". They are, but good luck selling something like bejeweled for 40 bucks a pop. And I doubt they spend .00001 of a percent as much as valve on HL2 or something.
Also, I know from personal experince that the only people who answer surveys are stay at home types and female. When I worked for a survey place it was easily 25 women respondants for every 1 male respondants. And we didn't exclusivly call from 9a to 5p either. We worked till 10p.
I would see my wife playing video games. A few months ago I bought a GBA SP cause it looked cool and I kept hearing great things about Advance Wars. Little did I know that 75% of it's use is by my wife who never touched my PS2. The 3D games "make her dizzy" she says. Seems she real likes the old school platformers like Yoshi's Island. She said she used to play it as a kid(much to my surprise). My daughter is almost as bad with the GBA, except I am ALLOWED to restrict her video game time. Probably going to need to get another SP within a few months if I ever want to finish Advance Wars. *sigh*
No Sig For You
- Chat to the NPC to find out if s/he has anything you need to know.
- Wait for NPC to get distracted
- Beat seven shades of shit out of NPC
- Empathise with NPC as you loot the body
It's kinda like being married except it's easier to do it repeatedly.Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
Well, if you read about what happened, you will find that the main problem was not the statistics, but that the polls were simply out of date and did not reflect the current public opinion.
There were also some statistical errors due to biased sampling, but pollsters have been using random sampling since not long after that election.
In other words, the Dewey/Truman debacle has no bearing on the reliability of modern statistical methodology.
Perhaps your point was that "pollsters can be wrong". Well, so what? Anyone can always be wrong. The question is which is more trustworthy, and I'd take the poll over the opinion of J. Random Slashdotter.
So let's say that the average female lifespan is about 78. And women make up about 51% of the population, now, when comparing a group from 6-17 (11 years) with a group that ranges over about 60 years, doesn't really seem like the basis of any fair extrapolation. In all reality this is really a construction by someone to get across an idea that they have and make it appear to be an objective fact.
In addition, I really can't recall how often 6-10 year olds play video games, it may just be that I really don't know any, but I don't think it can be that many, you're primary market (especially the ones your pumping the M rated games to) would be about 12-17 or so.
Actually reading the article reveals that the answer to the title question would be a negative, as when you compare similar age groupings, boys still dominate the consumption and play areas. In the 6-17 range boys are doing 9% more gaming than girls and in the 18+ range, boys are doing 12% more gaming than women.
The lead of the article is Challenging the stereotype that video gaming is the domain of teenage boys, an industry group on Tuesday reported that more women over 18 than young boys are playing games and the average age of players has risen to 29. Now, let's make a logical conclusion, the United States of America has a population of 18+ that far exceeds the 6-17 range, thanks in part to the baby boom and the fact that the secondary boom (which was more in spending than in population) is now moving into the 18+ range.
The survey was compiled from gamer data, not from the general population of the United States. You are taking a section of the population (gamers) and seperating them into four units (women and men, over and under 18) and then comparing two dissimilar segments (in relation to size) and trying to draw a conclusion.
All right, let me be coherent for a second. Essentially what I'm trying to say is that the article is stating the obvious that out of the whole, a larger group will make up a greater percentage. What they needed to do was say, We poled 242 kids under 18, now 220 of those are boys, that's right 91% of gamers under 18 are boys. Now, we polled 806 adults, 3 times the number of kids that we polled. Now, the poll seems to have some mathematical problems based on it's 3% error (because 21+26+38+12 equals 97) and when we factor in the percentages for adults we get that out of the total there were 273 women (rounded up) and 377 men (rounded down), added together this is 650. In this group, 58% of gamers are men and 42% are women, almost a 20 point disparity. Overall men make up 66% of the gaming population.
Now, throw this all out because this survey is trash in regards to following an actual trend as to what gender is growing in game consumption. A real survey would need to be truly blind and poll even non-games to get a good sense of what is going on and see the actual percentages of the entire population which has a larger game following per capita. It's far too late to makes sense.
And guess what? There's a reason for it, on both sides.
I know no one will read this, but I thought I'd share it really quick.
There are tons of people out there. If you don't have any prospects for a SO, it's because you're not mature enough. Relationships are for adults.
In biology you can predict a lot of things based on evolutionary timescales (asteroid bombardment, etc). In fashion a lot of things boil down to the California lifestyle (flip-flops, chaotic "beach" hair). In dating, anything that makes you seem more mature is usually attractive to a MOTOS.
For example, people without acne either know how to take care of their body, or are bodily mature enough that it's no longer there.
So, here's the advice: forget about girls/boys for awhile. Focus on your goals and aspirations, taking care of yourself, developing social skills. It's been said that MOTOS can tell a desperate person at first glance. Don't be desperate. If you're desperate, you're incapable (ie, too immature) of taking care of your current problems. You'll eventually find a mate. Why? Because there will always be MOTOS out there that are looking for a mature person to raise offspring with. Evolution, eh?
Sorry for the rant. It was a recent revelation.
In case you ever want to be PC, it's MOTAS (members of the appropriate sex). Not that I care personally, every thread in this article is nonsense.
This is something that seems liek a total shock to the videogame community and totally obvious to teh rest of us: Adults have more money than kids. I mean look at the PSX. It really supprised the shit out of Nintendo and Sega with its success. Well why did it succeed? Some people claim it was purely based on graphics but that has NEVER been enough to win a console war. Look at the Gameboy and its pathetic graphics. Other features (longer batteries, better games) kept it as king.
What Sony really did was go after adults. They still had kids games but I saw far more games targeted at adults on the PSX then I'd ever seen on any other console. Well, of course, adults are the ones making the money and are generally willing to buy more expensive toys for themselves than their kids. Add to that the large number of young adults with income but no children and you have a really large market.
These days I spend a whole lot on gaming. I probably get at least 3-6 games a year, not to mention playing a game that requires a subscription. This plus all the hardware I buy (I'm a computer gamer). Well when I was a kid I was lucky to get a new SNES game twice a year, my folks just wouldn't buy me that many, I had to rent them or trade friends.
So that is it for the males. But then it turns out that women AREN'T just spending time in the kitchen and making babies. Turns out they have jobs, social lives and oh yes, they like to have fun. So gee, big supprise, they ALSO like to (and are able to) buy games, more than kids can.
It really amazes me how industires can get so supprised by the blinding obvious sometimes. "Women have money and want to spend it on fun stuff? Holy shit! Why didn't someone tell me??" DUH.
Although peer pressure and prejudice probably do play a role in determining the gaming habits (or lack of them) of pre-pubescent girls, I think there's probably a little more to it than that: when you're a 6-year-old girl Barbie rocks. Barbie gets to change her clothes every 5 minutes and she gets to wear ball-gowns and wedding dresses. And she gets married. Often. (And without any pesky divorce proceedings in between, which just goes to prove what a wonderwoman Barbie really is.) Have you ever seen anyone get married in Quake? I don't think so. And no, changing guns every 5 minutes is just not the same as changing Barbie's clothes: it lacks that certain je ne sais quoi. Trust me.
In other words, I would say that the pre-pubescent gender gap regarding games is to a large extent due to the content (or lack of pertinent content maybe) of the games themselves.
Now, if we posit that the pre-pubescent gender gap is due to lack of Barbie in the games rather than some intrinsic value in gaming itself, and if we also posit a diminishing interest in Barbies as girls grow a little bit older, and if we further posit an increasing interest in boys (and as a corollary, in the interests of boys
The liver is evil and must be punished.
I looked through the article, but I didn't see the question they asked respondents. Consider the difference between "Have you purchased a video game in the past 12 months?", "Have you played a video game in the past 12 months?", and "Have you played a video game more than 10 times in the past 12 months?"
The first question would garner affirmative responses from parents, spouses, boy/girlfriends, grandparents and aunts/uncles. If we consider that women make most "gift" purchases, then women should show a history of purchasing video games even if they don't play games.
The second question would get hits from women whose partners pester them to play the occasional game, as well as those with idle interest in playing the occasional game.
Only the third question would really reveal whether we are talking about gamers.
That being said, I'm a married woman who loves games. And I don't work in R&D -- I'm a marketer. My husband? A software architect who finds games geeky.
Andrea
-- SYS 64738 --
People who follow hardware fanboy sites, buy $400 video cards, love throwaway games that you "win" once then never want to play again yet still complain that the games were too short, only play games fitting a narrow genre of 3D polygonal action...these are the hardcore game players. Hardcore games can be big, as witnessed by GTA3 and GTA:VC (over 5 million copies sold of each), but those are the exception. When you realize that the endlessly hyped Quake 3 only sold ~160,000 copies, then you realize what a slim and fickle market this is.
Well, i've worked at retail game stores in malls and otherplaces for like three years now through college and i've seen MAYBE two female gamers. Yeah sure your girlfriend plays solitare and Bejeweled but im talking about people who come in and buy the latest PS2 game and know what RPG stands for. Trust me, any time a beautifull baby comes into the store we interrigate to see if she is just getting a gift for someone or not!
*brain comes screeching to a halt. Stops... backs up and re-reads that post* Pardon me? Not only are you saying we don't exist, but we don't get laid? Let me clear up some misconception here. Most -female- /. members don't message unless they feel their viewpoint has not already been posted. So much of slashdot is "hot grits" that it takes one hell of a story (or misleading comment) to get us to hit that post button. It's like a swimming pool of tubby nerds... interesting to watch, but it takes a lot to make us jump in with you.
As for the getting laid comment, I have to say, if we aren't getting laid, then no one is. Between the large salary, ability to buy silk thigh-highs, wega tv's to input our custom media table top boxes with the lates l33t card of the moment, not to mention the all important couches that don't squeek when used... excessively...
I don't think getting laid is a problem for the average geek gal. Getting someone who knows how to to it right - and can navigate the hookup between the x-box, avi computer, mp3 server, dvd player, playstation 2 (yes I can use it as a dvd, I just like the damn remote), snes (I'm old school, shoot me) and uses more than a microwave when making dinner... THAT is a challenge.