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.

21 of 291 comments (clear)

  1. Simple Reason by jtwJGuevara · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Simple Reason by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      well the fact that many people that have PVR's like a myth tv or a tivo are not chained to the networks anymore. missing a show's air-time is nothing as it's available for viewing later.

      In fact cince I built my mythTV box, nobody in myu house has watched regular broadcanst CAble tv for 2 months. we watch the mythtv, specifically shows we wanted and then have multiplayer bouts of gaming.. (this rules for family interaction.. nothing like a 4 player mariocartGC race to get the family trash talking each other and interacting.)

      it's amazing how much actual TV is 100% worthless and getting worse every day.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Simple Reason by ogreinside · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Exactly. The generation of tv is passing, as evident by the lack of actual actors in the bulk of tv shows now.

      I'm not sure what the number are, but where are women in this figure? Why do they only report men? I know my wife will watch anything, anytime, anywhere, as long as it is mindless. I, on the other hand, need something that stimulates my mind. Interactive worlds, strategy, puzzles, and blowing shit up.

      No matter how hard they try, television shows will never be as interactive as an online gaming experience. I mean, really, is calling a number in response to a bunch of talentless morons trying to sing really that interactive?

      On another note, did anybody watch the "Test the Nation IQ" show? That was a better direction in something that can stimulate your mind. Oddly enough, you could go *online* and take the test...eliminating the need for watching the program. More shows like this, less midgets racing animals.

      --
      "The more you suffer, the more it shows you really care, right?" -Offspring
  2. what is considered the younger generation? by Em+Emalb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:what is considered the younger generation? by hobbespatch · · Score: 5, Insightful
      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.

      My grandparents have a ColecoVision that they play all the time. But being a 30 year old - and generation X - it seems like a lot of us have gaming addictions.

      As always - it comes down to doing things in moderation (coffee, sex, cigars, games) just don't be like the gamer in China who died after 20 straight hours online.

      --
      Still Mud? Try www.phoenixmud.org!
  3. I guess its about more interactivity. by Bilange · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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
  4. TV *and* GAMES by $$$$$exyGal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, but most of those people are multi-tasking with a TV show in the background.

    --
    Very popular slashdot journal for adul
  5. Makes me wonder by onyxruby · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  6. Nope by iibbmm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  7. Good by DrugCheese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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*
    1. Re:Good by Psiren · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Passive entertainment is mush, and forces your mind into the mold of the creators of that entertainment. Gaming puts you on an equal footing with someone else, the designer - or even better, the people you play a network game against.

      Utter bollocks. There is certainly a lot of crap television, no argument there. But I can happily sit down and watch a documentary, or wildlife programme and actually learn something. What do you learn by running around in a virtual environment shooting other virtual characters? Okay, it's an extreme example, but you're making it out to be black and white, TV bad, games good, when it's a far more complicated issue.

  8. Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  9. Inevitable by Myopic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  10. No surprising by st0rmshad0w · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  11. Re:It's too bad we don't hear things like.... by ebob9 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yknow, not to be offtopic.. but people complaining about the level of reading now today tend to overlook the obvious.

    My neighbor has a daughter, and complains that she is on the Internet all the time. She's constantly surfing the web, posting to message boards, and hanging out in chat rooms.

    What is her complaint? "I wish that she would get off the computer, maybe sit down and read something."

    Sheesh..

  12. It may have something to do with.. by Channard · · Score: 3, Insightful

    .. 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.

  13. Re:shocking by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Make more shows like Alias, X-Files, or La Femme Nikita that are/were actually interesting and you might retain some viewers"

    But making good drama costs money. "Reality TV" is basically free in comparison, and the drones will continue to watch since they have nothing else to do.

  14. Is it any surprise? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.
  15. Commercials by ShortedOut · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  16. Same excuse as everyone else uses! by swordgeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "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
  17. It's about the content, stupid. by humankind · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.