Slashdot Mirror
TV Losing to Video Games
An anonymous reader writes "Sony studies gaming habits finds that most games are played from 5pm to 11pm.
Shock! The days of the week might have been more useful..." of course the real point of all this is that the younger generation is turning away from television and turning to games.
most games are played from 5pm to 11pm
And what happens at 11pm? Oh yeah... Cinemax starts their quality material.
From 5pm to 11pm I go watch TV, read some book or do anything but websurfing, as due to all the online gamers my shared connection slows down to a crawl and you just can't do anything reasonable online.
Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
The 5-11 slot must be just for students.
I have to go to work every day, so most of my video game playing is restricted to 9am-5pm.
When you have nothing left to burn you must set yourself on fire
Simple reason - the quality of video games is consistently improving, and the quality of television material is consisently regressing. What kid wouldn't want to play the latest Final Fantasy/Legend of Zelda/id first person shooter when the other option is watching American Idol.
Those born in the 70s like me? The 60s? I mean, I know a lot of "older" people in their 30-40s who play games.
It's not just a younger generation thing. Unless a 44 year old is considered younger.
Sent from your iPad.
i recall at least 10 years ago, the next big thing was interactive tv/movies etc...
but they couldnt come up with something that worked. Yes on some tv shows the audience gets to vote...
games has taken the next step and will continue to erode the market share unless the people behind the programming can put something on tv that makes it worth while to watch.
With games going more and more realistic, I dont see whats the problem with games beating TV, which is kind of dull: turn on and watch. Hell, its not about Pong anymore.
"...a generation of kids has grown up thinking Trance is the shittiest music since country and western." - Paul van Dyk
Yes, but most of those people are multi-tasking with a TV show in the background.
Very popular slashdot journal for adul
I prefer to play games where I get to watch TV. Or I play the Sims and watch virtual people watch virtual TV. Fun!
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
Who would miss Family Guy and Futurama for a game?
8==8 Bones 8==8
TV is losing to reading books.
Even with the advent of the American coffee shop and the massive book retailers (B&N, Borders, etc.), people just don't read much it seems.
I've heard book sales are up, but not reading, which is highly interesting. It means people buy books with the intent of reading them but never do. Or they just want to seem smart? Who knows.
-gabe
Just great... now we're going to get product placement in video games.
This sig left unintentionally blank.
I've nearly completely switched from TV as an entertainment mechanism to video games on my PS2 and my PC. And I'm 33.
Besides, wasn't there just something published that said the average gamer is around 29-30 years old?
Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
Well I am sure at some point (if they do not already) they will have dedicated streaming content in those massive player online games and people will sit in their fake suburban homes and watch reruns of eFriends on their virtual TV's.
I make my face look like this and concerned words come out.
Makes me wonder, without sports and the likes of the Discovery and History channel if there would be any males of that age category watching TV.
Don't know about you, but I would prefer my kid to play competer games than watch cartoons, especially if he was gaming with a friend.
It is far less a passive activity, reactions, planning and memory all get a work out whilst playing games. Though of course I would still rather them outside running around or reading a book, but in the event of a rainy day there's nothing wrong with a bit of gaming.
The Sony study of online gaming previously mentioned in the article here is it?
It's simply because there isn't much on network television in that timeslot that is entertaining to men 18-35. Most tv on the networks is completely geared towards women or 'metrosexual' men that want to watch crap with a laugh track.
Cable, luckily, is noticing this problem and is now working towards more tv that appeals to men, though 90% of it is overdone crap (new manshow). Look to Discovery for an example of how to provide decent male programming. We are all watching Cnn, history, tlc, discovery, speed, spike (not me!), comedy central, or HBO.
Oh yeah, or playing Video Games.
I get a lot of crap from people who say I play to much video games. These same people then turn around and sit their ass on the couch the same ammount of time and watch TV. I think it's better for you to be playing video games then watching TV, at least you're participating in something.
*DrugCheese rants*
At least the games interact with them. I gave up TV for my computer years ago. One factor, subconciously, was that I was able to interact, whereas TV, I just sat, stared, laughed on cue, and watched commercials when I was told to.
Traditional video game consoles (I know this is changing with things like XBox Live) don't offer some of the same communication builders (e.g. IM, Voice IM, message boards, creating websites, etc.), but at least you can tell it what to do instead of it telling you what to do. And something about building hand-eye-coordination. I guess that is a plus, since remote controls don't require that much hand-eye coordination.
Remember Internet Killed the Video Star?
"...a generation of kids has grown up thinking Trance is the shittiest music since country and western." - Paul van Dyk
I honestly don't even watch TV anymore. I download a show if I want to see it, commercial free. TV in general just blows.
If a million monkeys randomly pounded on keyboards, they would all log into AOL.
... TV isn't.
while students can easily play all night, most working adults have to get up the next morning. thus, they play during TV prime time: the only time they otherwise have free. a more interesting study would be to see how many working adults play on weekend mornings before their spouse wakes up. (i, for one, definately don't do that...)
Although the spin on this is games, it probably applies to personal computer use in general. Many people, when given a choice, will pick their own entertainment rather than have it chosen for them. Shopping, reading, social interaction or... spoon-fed garbage. Not a tough choice.
Crushing my karma one post at a time.
I found that the Unreal Tournament 2004 demo is best played between 2-5am Eastern Time (local), when all the younger players (ie kids) are sleeping.
Civilization and Sim City, whoo boy. I would start playing those in the evening after work and not stop until I noticed (to my surprise) the sun coming up.
I'm one of them. Being able to game on-line, and talk to friends over the 'net while gaming is a very satisfying passtime. It's more interactive, more social, and more exciting.
You never know if the game will end in your favor or not... You really have to work with your friends to make it happen!
~D
This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
Sony studies gaming habits finds that most games are played from 5pm to 11pm
This just in: studies show that all games are played between 00:00 and 23:59, TV networks are worried!
I mean come on, 5pm to 11pm is 6 hours, that's a quarter of a day. Even if it's a "span that encompasses TV prime time", that doesn't mean people play games for 6 hours. What if people play games most of the time during dumb shows, and during ads, and stop to watch their favorite shows?
What I'm saying is that the study seems way too coarse to deduce anything useful from it. Ideally, it should show console vs. TV usage by the minute.
Also, you'll notice that Sony, a manufacturer of consoles, did the study, not an independant, impartial organization.
In short, this article doesn't bring much useful information.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
G4 Growth Story Here
"I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX
With the fall-off in TV ratings, it seems that ads will soon be creeping into computer games. This will include product placements in traditional games and free games that market products. I notice that EA already has a director of advertising sales.
With no "fast forward" in games, players will have little choice but to be exposed to these product placements (other than avoiding/abandoning the game). I wonder if game makers will offer dual-versions of games -- an ad-free version for $99 and an add-supported version for $29? Given people's tendency to by the cheaper option, wonder which version will have the highest sales?
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
5-11pm more indicates the "working stiff" bracket, to me.
:wq
So yes, they're online and counting that way, but if you've ever played Everquest, you know that the downtime and the waiting around are so bad you NEED a TV to watch between kills :)
I'd rather buy videogames than cable TV. Basic digital cable is $50. I can buy a game a month for that and get a lot more entertainment. And then I can sell the game back when I've beat it. I can't resell my digital cable. Stupid encryption.
Not really since console users are using the tv to play their games on. Those on PC with a tv nearby are too focused on their game to be bothered with endless commercials and brainless sitcoms. PC gamers would rather just turn the tv off.
Original /. article from 3 days ago is here
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
is the day I turn off the computer.
Maybe they could have a virtual survivor, where they still have to swim and get the flag, but I get to crouch on the beach and snipe at them the whole time.
Sony's study also suggests that gamers who play ganes on the PS2 experience nearly 70 percent more "fun-itude" than XBox and Gamecube gamers.
DecafJedi
my weblog: apropos of something
No one really thinks t.v. is a great medium, anyway. It's passive. That was the complaint all along -- people rotting their brains watching a passive medium for hours and hours. It should be no surprise that other exciting electrical mediums like games and (more important to me) the internet will supplant television. I don't think t.v. is going to go away because sometimes a passive video medium is appropriate (sitcoms and dramas as we know them can't really be interactive; movies; etc.), but viewership will shrink (in terms of average hours watched).
Nobody thinks this is a bad thing. Yo, if someone is going to waste their time consuming hollow, useless things they may as well do it actively, interactively, rather than watching produced, linear shows.
I'm inclined to side with the networks on this one -- an 8-12% drop in one year (or season, it doesn't say) seems a bit unlikely. Especially since in large parts of the country it was too freaking cold to go outside in January and February. Games certainly haven't gotten that much better, and everyone here constantly talks about how much worse they are. (Don't ask me -- I'm slow and old and still struggling to finish Tony Hawk 2.)
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
There's a certain balance that needs to be maintained between advertising and content for something to hold ones attention. If the content's really good, I might be willing to suffer the advertising. If the advertising's really good, I might be willing to suffer through the super bowl. When both turn to crap, as has happened with TV in the last few years, it's almost futile to resist the impulse to switch off the set. The real question is what will happen when advertisers figure out that their captive audience is now in a different media. Hopefully they won't follow, or the video game industry will be wise enough to ensure that content doesn't suffer. Just my knee jerk reaction, and no I didn't read the article.
You can play any game you want, any time you want, unlike TV. There are no ads that are annoying or break up the action (Just load screens, but those are usually pretty quick). You don't have to pay for games you don't play (Unlike TV where you pay for channels you don't watch).
With the added challenge and social aspects of on-line gaming, it's honestly not a big surprise that it's catching on...
~D
This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
For me, I'd rather play video games than watch TV because it engages my brain and makes me think more than just vegging in front of the tube. More active, instead of passive entertainment...
If I want to disengage my brain, I'll sleep (which doesn't happen much...)
I'm your average 23 year old male college student. However TV is horrible lately, I just download the only 2 shows I like (angel and enterprise) and never go near the television itself. Maybe if the networks stopped with the reality shows and started putting back some well written high production value shows, i'd be more inclined to come back. As it is however, I'm not going to sit around and watch crap for days on end when I only really want to see 2 hours of programs per week.
Especially considering that networks are doing such brilliant things as cancelling their highest rated shows and generally screwing up everything else that's worth tuning in for.
Didn't we already cover this today?
TV in the UK (and i assume the US) is by and large poor the internet lets you view material that meets your exact requirements rather than having to channel surf to find something that doesnt drive you crazy. Games are just what PC literate people do when they are bored of the internet. I know lots of people read but im goin to make a gross generalisation here and say most techy people dont.
I just moved into a new apartment, and didn't bother with cable. I've got dsl, and between my PC and PS2, I haven't missed TV. If there's a Cavs game on, I just listen to it on the radio, and if there's a show I can't miss,(Chappelle's Show) I download it. Unless I switch to a cable ISP, I don't know that I'll pay for TV again.
"from the bricks to the booth...I predict the future like Cleo the psychic..."
Slashdot moderators too busy playing games to read their own site. Repost a 11
Chris Kuivenhoven is a thief, beware
If you want to look at a naked Richard Hatch through a scope, you go right ahead.
*shudder*
St0p c@mP1nG, d00d!
The networks put out absolutely nothing but reality shows about "My Big Fat Stupid Fiancee" or "The Mightiest Midget Survival Wedding Swing Dancing Sensation" and can't figure out why people are leaving in droves. Here's a hint...they're sick of it. Make more shows like Alias, X-Files, or La Femme Nikita that are/were actually interesting and you might retain some viewers. Otherwise I see no reason to switch off my monitor just to go watch some crap.
slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
Just because you don't see people around you doing it doesn't mean it isn't happening. ::smiles::
Video games are a good medium for storytelling or otherwise entertaining diversions. The back and forth format is much more compelling than the non-interactive format of Television or movies. Movies are better than broadcast/cable because with movies the content is prepaid for and there are no commercial breaks wasting your time and polluting your concious.
The advent of movies and video games as storytelling mechanisms, combined with the internet as a reference tool comingled with art and business sharing social networks, drives a hard bargain for our time with printed books. The good news though is that some printed books are actually still worth reading. Why? Content!
People are still going to be reading the Lord of the Rings sixty years from now, but I doubt they'll be watching the Peter Jackson distillation. People are still going to be reading the gospels in sixty years, but I doubt they'll be watching The Passion as a replacement. Why? The original text has too much content to film or make a video game out of.
Words mean things, they refer to ideas and abstracts. Visuals have to refer to concretes (unless the visual is a picture of a word) and through the manipulation of concretes an idea is implied. It is a LOT more effective to start with words to begin with when there is a lot to be communicated. Like the printed prologue in a video game manual or the dialoge between a couple characters.
I think I'm in that category (does age 22 count as "younger generation" - I haven't RTFA) and I watch TV almost solely for news - half an hour of BBC News 24 and half an hour of BBC Parliament most evenings. (I don't play computer games much, though - I play board and card games, instead. Mainly Magic: the Gathering (and yes, I know one can play it online, but I don't)).
.. every damn other programme being reality TV. Why watch a show about someone living a life - or more often than not, staying in a big house with other z grade celebs - when you could actually stick a game in and have some level of interactivity going.
Well when you cancel the great shows(Angel,Enterprise, Family Guy,Firefly) and only put on drivel the mindless masses watch then what do you expect. The television industry is getting as bad as the music industry. They feed us crapola and then expect us to smile and tell them how good it taste. Anyone notice a trend how they are playing more 80's music? I think they are starting to realize that alot of current music and media is pure swill. I see television a form of art and right now they are in their "El Crap" period.
I'll be 34 this year and I watch virtually zero regular television. Just about the only regular show I'll make a note to watch is "Faking It" My news comes from online sources and my entertainment from online gaming. Compared to gaming I find television is simply far too passive. Even if that wasn't the case the content is hardly filled with quality and innovation. I do have a small library of DVDs which includes movies and British TV Comedy (are you local?) but again that's what I want, when I want rather than what the TV company chooses to push into my house.
I rarely watch TV outside of a few shows, these include: SG1, Enterprise, Smallville, JAG, NCIS, Monk. most are in conflicting timeslots, but the real important ones (ENT, Sg1) i download and watch commercial free :)
most others are time shifted, with actual time spent watching = TRT+5 (total show time + 5 minutes over the course of the tape for zapping pesky commercials due to lack of a decent tivo like device (slow HD on my tv box)
Logistical Chaos Officer http://www.slagg.org - LAN Gaming in Sarasota FL,USA
Most people are home and awake between 5pm and 11pm. So, when would most people playing games play them? Could it be? Naah...
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
of course the real point of all this is that the younger generation is turning away from television and turning to games.
... but for the last decade it's been nothing but games, games, games.
Not just the younger generation. Tomorrow is my 43rd birthday. When I was a kid, I watched plenty of TV
-kgj
-kgj
if you have a laptop with a decent 3d card and a tv out. You can play stuff in 640x480 and it WILL look good on a TV screen.
Oh, wait, you mean using the coaxial for analog video?
Reality show
CSI Miami
Law and Order
stick finger in mouth, regurgitate, repeat show.
On the other hand Q3 is new every night!
Its not uncommon for me to have at least one TV on while gaming besides the one I'm playing on. Sometimes it may be two depending on what games are on TV. There are some games like SOCOM II where you have alot of dead time to watch TV during the game.
So does this mean that advertisers are going to start buying up time in video games? Billboards telling me to drink Coke... or maybe even more intrusive -- every 15 minutes you have to sit through a minute of advertising. Could also drop the price of video games.
Hmmm, fake reality TV show or video game. It's a no brainer.
I buy no less than 2 unix, linux, or technology related books a month. I also have a wife and two kids that keep me from getting much reading done. I try to read at work in between puting out fires. The end result is that I have a great library which I dont use much. The upside is that I don't have to go far to get answers when I need them. I also have a PVR to record TV programs and can now selectively watch what I want which leads to much less couch time and more Joystick time.
Telecommuting! What about socialization?
People want to interact with stuff. 'Course they're going to go with vid games.
If tv is so worried, why don't they work on interactive tv where people can at least "choose your own adventure" for some of their shows. Soaps would be easy to do. Same for formula SF (Star Treck, Star Gate, Star Search, etc.).
I drank what? -- Socrates
1. The Daily Show
2. Conan O'Brien
Even most Trek episodes one can get commercial free on the web, there just isn't any incentive for me to watch TV.
Corporations: your universal scapegoat for all society's ills.
The day they let you shoot Survivor "contestant is the day I turn off the computer.
... I'd pay good money to watch them getting forcefully removed from the evolutionary process. The species is adversely affected by their genetic presence, and a cleanup of the gene pool would be worth watching.
Yeah, but the day they televise someone capping the idiot who got rich "inventing" reality tv is the day I'll turn back on the television, if only for those few, choice minutes. I don't want to watch ordinary people who get lured into 15 minutes of self-derogatory fame by rich TV execs get killed, but the jackasses who get rich on these train wrecks
Maybe they could have a virtual survivor, where they still have to swim and get the flag, but I get to crouch on the beach and snipe at them the whole time.
It shouldn't be too hard to put together a Doom or Quake WAD to do just that.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Most Extream Elimination Challenge(MXC) on spike TV is the closest thing to what you describe. You get to watch Japanese game show contestants take extream punishment while being made fun of buy the english tranlators. Of course it would be much better if it was interactive and you held the controls.
Telecommuting! What about socialization?
When will the networks learn that 20 and 30 somethings are tired of commercials? There has to be another way for a TV network to make money.
Just like HBO, sure you pay for it, sure it doesn't have any commercials for OTHER companies, but damn they love to plug HBO every chance they get. I already bought the damn channel, I don't need to know how great you are.
I think gamers and nerds are just tired of the constant stream of bullshit that is coming from the media. This especially goes for all the half-truths and demonizing of opponents in the upcoming elections.
We'd rather hang out with friends and frag each other than sit still on the couch and be force fed bullshit and editorialized news.
Martha Stewart, Michael Jackson, Kobe Bryant, I couldn't give less of a shit about, but they're on the news every day because that is what advertising firms say that the US is interested in.
We've got a freaking WAR in Iraq that we only hear about in blurbs. We have TROOPS in Afganistan that we're lucky to hear about once a week. And we have diplomatic issues with France and Europe that we NEVER hear about. What about that whackjob over in North Korea? Why is China so quiet about everything? That's what I want to hear about, not how many kids Michael Jackson touched or how this woman is missing in Minnesota, hell people go missing in my local area every day, why did she rate?
That's why I get my news here, and other online sources. It's because it's on demand, and what I want to read about. And best of all, I don't have to watch any commercials.
The statistics in the survey are pretty useless without more context. While it may be true that people (more specifically 18-34 year old males) are abandoning TV for online gaming this article says nothing. Is there anything that shows that [increased video game usage] is related to [decline in TV viewing by 18-34 year olds]
1. Peak online usage from 5-11, which includes TV prime time. This should hardly be shocking because there has to be a peak period, and because TV prime time would tend to correspond to viewer's free time.
2. 65% of online users between 8-11 pm are men 18-34. Says nothing about what percentage of PS2 owners are between 18-34, whether that percentage is dramatically different than other periods, or what the reason is. Perhaps proportionately more 10-18 year old PS2 owners are watching Idol... or that they have real friends that come over to play live
3. TV viewership in 18-34 year old demographic is down 8-12%. Fine, could be for any reason, but of course this data is from another source (Nielsen). Sony's survey (or what was quoted in the article) did not demonstrate any increase in gaming activity from year to year, nor any statistics to show it was drawing from anything else.
This is why their conclusion basically says nothing - "increased video game play could be among the many factors leading to the decline in TV viewership by young men". Why stop there? I think we could also generalize that [increased video game usage] must also be related to [lower CD sales] since I heard that CD sales were lower too.
Maybe not ad-supported, but games have definately had ads for awhile. I think even back in the Keen days you could pick up little coke bottles etc for health?
The trick is that in video games many ads are there but not obtrusive. When you're installing a game, it may show ads for other games, etc. When you're playing, something like a FPS for example, there may be billboards for Pepsi, or something equally non-descript. It's not blatantly in-your-face, but there still is a subliminal factor (particularly if you get an urge to drink a Pepsi while playing).
I really don't mind if ads enter games in this fashion... let the Sims have a McDonalds... it's when I get force-fed them TV style that I'll start getting annoyed.
Heck, for a smaller gaming company, ads might be great for revenue, especially online. Websites cost to support, gaming servers more... so why not have a little Blizzard-esque banner in the chatroom, or a banner beside the skyscraper in my FPS. If Jolt cola sponsors you evough to pay your servers, and you get more people drinking jolt while gaming, then everyone wins.
Stay posted for upcoming games from id
You just gave them their next idea!!!
you'll only have to look at him once.
I think I can tell by your post that you used to watch the cable channels you listed but don't actually anymore. Know how? Because you listed TLC as a "guy" channel.
See, I haven't had cable in a few years, but I used to watch The Learning Channel all the time in the mid 90's. It rocked - remember Connections and then Connections 2? THAT was quality TV! That was GUY TV! But lately I've had a few glimpses of today's TLC at a friend's house, and I've been shocked and dismayed at what has become of by beloved Learning Channel.
I mean, Trading Spaces? WTF? TLC is now some kind of hybrid between Better Homes & Gardens and The Real World.
They've even gone all "Kentucky Fried Chicken" with their name - no more mention of "The Learning Channel" at all. They're just "TLC" and they have nothing to do with Learning or education at all.
Around 1993 there was enormous interest from the cable TV
companies and the networks to produce interactive set-top
boxes to replace the cable-TV boxes. All of the trials failed
for similar reasons.
People have a budget for entertainment; some number of hours
per week, and some amount they are willing to spend per month.
There is very little people can do to expand their budget, they
have a fixed income, what little is left over after everything
else is paid can be used for entertainment. They have jobs that
are demanding more of their time, what is left after household
chores, is what's available for entertainment.
Everyone behaves in a way to maximize the enjoyment of this
limited budget. This had a number of direct consequences:
- you could not convince people to spend more money on a new
service, instead if the new service was, it took the revenue
from the old service. Interactive TV games took
away normal TV watching. Networks hated this as their revenue was
from advertising and there was less opportunity for ads in
games.
- If people could get a hour of entertainment, instead of 45
minutes entertainment + 15 minutes of ads then they would of
course reject the ads, even if the entertainment was of a
slightly lower quality. Quantity outweighed quality.
- New cable content could only take revenue away from old cable
content. People went to see movies, or out for the night before
watching TV.
- DVDs were guaranteed to take revenue from TV, no ads.
- People preferred interacting with other people more than
watching TV by themselves, the entertainment value was higher.
Multi-player games would appeal to people more than TV.
PS2/Xbox/GameCube games are a much higher quality than the games
in 1993. Games like HalfLife, FinalFantasy that provide an unfolding
plot are capturing people who also want a good story. It's not
surprising that TV is losing out even if the quality hadn't slipped.
TV quality has slipped enormously in my personal opinion. I hate
most reality shows - petty human behavior isn't real entertainment.
I want to get away from that, I see enough around me everyday.
My wife and I are 40 and our entertainment priorities have changed
in the past five years. In order of priority:
- Live theater
- Dining with friends
- Movies in theater
- Board games with friends.
- News and browsing on the Internet
- PS2 games
- Reading books.
- DVDs
- some select TV shows through PVR, on our schedule, skipping ads.
Hardly ever watch the news on TV as it's mostly content free.
- live TV, almost never.
- AndrewN
TV is getting (or really has been) really repetitive, and I'm personally sick of it.
I'm tired of these reality shoes, these Law and Order CSI type shows, these buffy shows.. these fake Brady Bunch shows...
Give me something new and I'll stop playing my viedo games!
I see, like in "Liberty City Survivor".
...
Back to playing games
I watch very little TV anymore, sports, old movies, and some news(Fox). What is there to watch? It's all pure unadulterated crap. Sitcoms with no humor, lack of reality shows, and gossip trying to pass as news. Or HBO's one decent movie per quarter. Who needs it?
News online - up to date, less spin.
Games - BF1942, MOHAA.
Comedy - Slashdot comments.
Thats a complete evening for me, unless the History channel has something.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
I'll take anything over that rubbish.
Hecubas
no competition... we love the interaction, the challenge, the mental stimulation, the online community culture. whaddya get with a TV? Sitting, staring, commercials every 15 minutes. what else? Its a no-brainer.
Is the juice worth the sqeeze?
"Kids aren't buying music--it's because of file sharing!"
"Kids aren't watching TV--it's because of computer games!"
"Our software isn't selling--it's because of Microsoft!"
How hard is it to figure out that YOUR CONTENT SUCKS!!!? Maybe those other things play a part. Maybe the competition for your audience has become stiffer. Producing ever-increasingly BAD content and blaming the competition isn't going to fix anything!
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Most of the reading people tend to do, tends to be informationless anyway. You might as well be watching TV, it does nothing to enrich the brain.
What does that have to do with the price of rice? Reading say, some star wars book, just for the act of it, is infinitely better for the mind then staring slackjawed at a moving picture box. When you read, you make are unconsciously learning connections about spelling, grammar, vocabulary etc. You may not percieve it, but your brain is making connections that it wouldn't if you were gazing at a midget trying to make it with too tall chicks on FOX.
If I were painting some dogs playing poker, it would be far more enriching then 99 percent of television, regardless of the artistic merit of my painting.
"Inattention makes clowns of us all" -Bean
Robotech had an elite Ace who got his skills from playing video games.
Last Starfighter recruits from video game aces.
I took them to heart at an early age, now I'm playing world caliber on RTS games.
God spoke to me
To give you some background, I am an upper-middle class male, married, age 25 to 29, lots of disposable income - one of the "money" demographics. Currently, my television habits are limited to Laker games, some discovery channel, and the Simpsons. Once the basketball season is over, I watch about 2 hours of television per week. I spend roughly three times that playing video games.
My reason for hardly watching television anymore is simple - I am sick and tired of being told that I am an idiot because I am male. 99% of sitcoms are based on the premise that the husband is a complete screwup, and his wife has to come save him from himself. In commercials, we see men who are unable to perform basic tasks, while their wife smirks knowingly, before doing it for him. We have shows like "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" that in essence give the message that masculinity is bad, and that the only way that a male can be worthwhile is to change his entire life to meet his wife's whims.
Anyway, that is just my $0.02. YMMV. HAND. .
ThisIsAnExampleAccountGL@yahoo.com
What kind of gamer stop at 11:00pm ? I really keep playing after 12:00am easily.
sign(c14n(envelop(this)), x509)
It's funny how people think everything is so black and white. If they are playing games, they can't be watching TV. Hmmm... I play America's Army, www.americasarmy.com, with a group of teenagers. These kid are talking on Team Speak, playing AA, and watching TV all at the same time.
played from 5pm to 11pm
For most video games I play this would be from 5pm to 11pm the next day.
( already fearing the damage the next GTA will do to my social life )
Gee, lets think a moment here. What gender plays a majority of video games. Males. What gender is prime time programming geared towards? Females. Why in the world would any straight male want to watch these lame ass reality shows that are geared towards women. Guys who generally watch this crap probably have a gun held to their head (figuratively speaking) or they have a large amount of estrogen pulsing through their veins. There is nothing on TV worth while watching anymore. Can someone name somthing on Broadcast television that isnt crap? What do we have to watch. Spike TV and ESPN on cable/dish. What is the prime demographic that Television tries to encapsulate? Males 18 - 35 Guys play games. Guys own the TV. Why in the hell do we want to watch shows such as Friends and Queer Eye? So, we turn to our games. For example, a last night from 5:00pm till 11:00pm, tried to finish up Balders Gate. The last Boss, is a pain in the ass.
This is my signature.
Who wants all that crap?
Sit down at a computer and get what you want, how you want it, when you want it and for as long as you like. p Rich
Hey! I'll bet a lot of Slashdotters are in their late twenties to mid-thirties. I wouldn't exactly consider that the younger generation. And I would also guess that most of us thirty somethings have far more money to spend on video games too. Finally, I'm betting that most of the 5-11PM gamers are thirtysomethings.
Un-news
Why is it that the major broadcasters and Madison Avenue have to turn to other corporate parasites like polling companies to try to understand the dynamics of an issue such as this?
Maybe it's because they don't want to acknowledge the truth? Or are they truly that stupid?
Television used to be about entertaining and educating. Now it's hard to tell what is content and what is advertising. The constant barrage of interruptions and marketing messages have turned off their audience. Things are so bad now, commercial breaks are so long, that when the networks return from a commercial break, they have to recap what the actual show was about!
Hollywood seems to think that shows like, "The Apprentice" or "Survivor: All-Stars" are actually "hits". The truth is we watch those shows to see how much of an ass people can make of themselves, not unlike your average motorist cranks his head out of the window to see a wreck on the Interstate. We don't think the shows are very good; instead we are amused by the extent to which these producers manufacture conflict and make people look like idiots. Yes, it's entertaining, but only in the most shallow way, which means there will be no longevity. Hell yes, it's fun to watch Donald Trump's ego spiral out of control, but make no mistake that at some point this will get incredibly boring if it hasn't already. And then we get to see how creative they'll be in blaming everyone but themselves for the loss of ratings.
In addition to an overwhelming amount of advertising, the content just plain sucks, WHEN you can actually find it. Most shows are little more than superficial Pavlovian plot lines with one-dimensional characters and predictable twists, bad remakes or sequels, or else they're reality programs that are edited out-of-context to over-dramatize every nuance of conflict and embarassement.
Hollywood seems to think that most people, even your average brain-dead couch potato can be played with formulaic programming. And when it doesn't seem to pan out like that, rather than admit their stupid ideas aren't working, they start commissioning research companies to pull another explanation out of thin air. Video games are killing TV. NO. It's just that TV is so bad, it's more desireable than sitting through a zillion SUV commercials.
It's the content, stupid.
> If you want to look at a naked Richard Hatch through a scope, you go right ahead.
According to Shi Ann, you'd *need* a scope!
"Hey, did you see the commercial where the guy's talking to a cow?"
:/"
"Um... no"
"Are you sure? It's on all the time on almost every station! It's hilarious!"
"Ok. Do you remember what it was for? Maybe I can download it..."
"Don't you watch TV?"
"Not really. Been levelling my assassin and doing VB homework.
*blank stare* "...oh"
One hour of tv has 44 minutes of content and 16 minutes of commercials.
One hour of gaming / dvd has 1 hour of content.
Imagine if the TV ads said "Watch show X and waste 1/4th of your time".
For the subset of /. community who do have significant others, one downside to this TV->RGP/gaming transition is that the evenings have less and less cuddle time.
Now that I think about it, it might be the very reason why my ex and I broke up. We forgot how to cuddle and were too buys geeking out in RPGs.
=/
Music nowadays? JUNK...
Where are all the beautiful riffs... the edge... the songs about people, about you and me... about our feelings... anger, love, sacrifice, pain, angst, passion... Most of what we get is noise now... no content, no meat, no soul.
Remember the music of the Beatles, Bread, Journey, Led Zepplin, Scorpion, Carole King, KLF, Tears for Fears, Devo, The Police, Queen, John Couger Mellencamp, etc etc... the list of the great ones, goes on and on...
What do we get nowadays? Britney Spears, N'Sync, P Diddy, Celine Dion... What do they sing/crow about... gangs, 'dissing', hoes, pimps, themselves...
And TV? Crap. Reality Shows. 5 Gays dressing-up 1 Guy. The sometimes mundane, and often poison-laced scheming and dealing in 'Survivor'-like reality shows. Too many advertisments that are too loud and shallow.
Granted, there is good material, but mostly on paid cable, like HBO. Broadcast TV sucks, big time.
And movies, other than a few notable mentions, most movies produced in Hollywood are shallow, slapstick, overdone, over-budget, drivel... and to top it off, ticket prices are getting more and more expensive.
And they (the 'Execs') wonder about declining sales of music CDs, declining numbers of TV viewship and falling theatre attendances. Clueless morons, blaming p2p music-sharing, DVD burners, gaming industry, etc...
Give me a good game anytime, and don't waste my evenings, thank you.
pEE-oHHed
and hopefully result in free view camera angles for my gay porn.
All your preview button are belong to Hello Kitty.
With a good, old fashioned VCR. Thus, I only turn on the TV to play videogames or to watch taped shows.
:-)
I'm not trying to be an elitist arsehole by saying "I don't watch TV anymore because it makes you stupid", just that I don't watch it anymore because I have better options! Right now I'm about to leave my office, I'll go home, I'll play KotoR for two hours and then off to the pub for a few beers.
Gotta remember to set the VCR before leaving home though
1. Release video media on game machines
2. ?????
3. Profit!!
I know with one of my sister's kids, they were glued to the laptop watching Lord of the Rings, not that they haven't seen it before, but because it was on a laptop, and that was just so cool. But just as soon as the laptop had to be used for laptopy things and it was moved to the TV, they walked away because it was no longer so neet.
What if they were to bundle a theme based game along with a show. This way they can actually get the damn kids to watch video media in a new way and regain that market share.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
They are complaining that the 18-34 male demo is playing games over television. Maybe this is because guys enjoy computer games, OR maybe it's because these lame tv shows are all aimed at chicks.
Will and Grace? Friends? The various Party of Five rip-offs featured on the WB network?
Last I checked Football season was over and they cancelled Firefly. What the hell am I supposed to watch? The Simpsons and Seinfeld re-runs are all we have left.
Thanks but no thanks. Despite the fact that Arrested Development is a good show I refuse to sit through crap like Malcolm in the Middle. South Park and Chappelle Show timeslots aren't set in stone so watching those the following day is just fine with me.
The crap they spew to women during the day (One life to Live et al.. and Oprah) has permeated into primetime viewing hours in the form of lame relationship shows like King of Queens and Everybody Loves Raymond. I suppose some guys like Survivor. Fair enough. But if the networks want this demo back they need to make more shows like Magnum PI and the Sopranos and less shows like Friends and Sex and the City.
better than tv "They may make you sharper, according to a new study. Researchers at the University of Rochester found that young adults who regularly played action-based video games showed better visual skills than those who didn't."
Yet even regular programs with a decent story, interesting dialog and advanced character development are hobbled by the commercials. In a given hour, commericals comprise nearly one third of the time. They're distracting, irritating mindless, even more than reality shows.
And no, I don't want to shell out $200 + a monthly fee for a Tivo.
30 minute shows are about 21 to 22 minutes long.
1 hour shows are about 42 to 44 minutes long.
That's 28 percent commercials.
Strip out the credits and title screen lead in from the show and you get the entire show down to 18 to 20 minutes per half hour or 36 to 40 per hourlong show.
The actual content for the show is therefore about
65 percent.
In other words, 1/3rd of the broadcast show is just commercial or other non-content stuff.
For some programs, such as local TV news, actual content is much less than half of the broadcast time.
This means that the promo telling us that channel 22 is 'the place for local news' does not count as content.
One of the channels just started a huge bug with their logo and I feel motion sickness watching that channel whenever they pan a certain way. Considering I'm about as desensitized to motion sickness as anyone I know, I wonder how many people have real problems with some of the bugs.
I want my porn dam you! Start posting that porn! Porn of you!
I just want to thank you for expressing what has been on my mind.
I haven't had cable for about half a year now. Why? Because it was getting to the point that all I was watching was "Who's Line Is It Anyway?" and "The Daily Show". There was nothing else on that was any good, no matter how much I channel-surfed.
And then I find out that these networks have been cancelling all these TV shows that might have kept me watching: Firefly, Angel, Dark Angel, and so on. Are there any decent TV shows now? I'd really like to know. As far as I'm concerned, these networks are digging their own grave.
Also this video game crap isn't the worst. I've read articles blaming DVDs and the internet for lost ratings too.
If only I could afford a second TV the same size as the first, this might hold true.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
I can see it now........
Survivor:1942
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
I could have told you that.
When we watch television, what do we see? Short shows and long commercials? Yep.
With video games... who is in control? We are. We do what we want when we want.
In a movie, sometimes we just want the hero to kill the bad guy instead of being a pussy and arresting him, but does he? Nope.
In a video game, we can kill and arrest him.
"Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
This is something the various talking heads/media can't figure out. Its really simple: humans like to play games. Sure the game industry focuses on a certain demographic because its the demographic that pays out, but there really isn't anything strange about people of any age playing games. Do we faint when we see old men playing chess in the park?
If anything, the rise and fall of television was an aberration - a sort of growing pain. The fact that so many people see it as a norm shows us how far we have fallen from what I would call our roots. I think its natural to want to be entertained, but all day/all night TV watching is just too much. Its natural to play games and compete but being a pale gamer is taking it too far and getting into fistfights over your local sports team is just the same obsessive behavoir.
I guess this is just a reiteration of "take all things in moderation."
People get to choose how they spend their spare time now?
Back in '99 I got my first real PC and access to the internet. Heck, I didn't even own any games until the following year I spent so much time online.
AOL, to Cable, and then 56k for the past few years while i've been in the Navy (base didn't have broadband where I was).
Television became boring to me, passive, whereas when I was online I could entertain myself however and whenever I felt like it. It became an unlimited education tool through which I taught myself all kinds of things in every subject. History, Science, Math, you name it.
I have learned about societies other than my own, and even more about my own. I have also learned about the various societies created and survived by the internet.
The games, were just a filler. Hardly even play those anymore either except my old sega games.
Anyway, the ability to entertain myself at my own leisure is why I turned away from this force-fed propaganda and mindless drivel that is the same thing rehashed and resold again and again and again.
All your base are belong to Google.
Surely you meant to say Skinemax? How 'bout Show(MeSomeMore)Time?