Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Gamer Behavior Categorized

Posted by Zonk on from the and-easily-referenced dept.

Vodoo Extreme has the results from a recent study that looks into the spending and playing habits of gamers. From the article: "Gamers spend more than $700 a year: $341 on console titles, $233 on PC games and another $140 for accessories."

6 of 86 comments (clear)

  1. RTFA by MMaestro · · Score: 5, Interesting
    IGN polled over 5,000 people from around the network gathering stats on their spending habits, time spent playing games a week and other related jazz. Here are some of the results

    IGN pulls a poll and Slashdot reports it as a 'study'.

  2. Only 14 a year? by McKinney83 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    $700 a year at ~$50 a game means that they're only getting 14 a year.

    Maybe the people surveyed took off $$ for trade-ins or only buy $30 and under games because that estimate seems rather low to me.

    --
    Winner of The Second Annual Montgomery Burns Award for Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence.
    1. Re:Only 14 a year? by aztektum · · Score: 2, Interesting
      This is just an IGN poll, not a indepth study, but if it's even close to being accurate, makes you wonder why so much money is spent on titles that will go unnoticed.

      If I were a publisher (a big one, EA, Activision...) instead of bitchin' about how much it costs to make 15 average games a year, I'd slice that release number by 2/3, make 5 or so kick ass games a year (for all platforms combined) and save the money I didn't spend on the other 10 crappers for stoking a hot fire on a cold night.

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    2. Re:Only 14 a year? by Lynxara · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nintendo, back in the NES days, used to restrict how many titles licensees could release a year basically to enforce this business model.

    3. Re:Only 14 a year? by Weirdofreak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Or alternatively, they did it to uphold their monopoly.

      That's what the Wikipedia article suggests anyway, and I find it much more believable if the other things mentioned are true: orchestrating shortages, antitrust and only starting to put quality over quantity because they didn't have enough resources to manufacture lots of games.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NES
      http://en.wiki pedia.org/wiki/Nintendo

  3. Rentals? by CosmicDreams · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is an interesting question. How much do I spend on games a year. I bet the majority of my money is spent on renting games rather than buying them.

    Some games aren't worth keeping after you beat them. Some games look good but don't have enough variety to keep you interested. There are a ton of games out there I'd rather not own.

    Renting games is a good way to keep the costs down. Now if only Gamefly would build another distribution center near me, I'd be all set.

    --
    Go Gusties