Slashdot Mirror


Men Spend More on Video Games Than Music

Jakob Paulsen writes "According to research group Nielsen Entertainment, men now spend more money on buying games than on buying music. This adds further credit to the general belief that video games are displacing other forms of media for the attention of young men. Nielsen base their findings on interviews with 1,500 people in January and February."

57 comments

  1. Understandable by Dash'n'SlashDot · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think this is more of a product of men being more capable of pirating music than of pirating games as emulation of current consoles is hardly a replacement for the real thing.

    1. Re:Understandable by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Minorities also spend far more money on video ame purchases than caucasians. I was surprised by that.

      Then again, this is as surprising as "women spend more money on shoes". Except that videogames are actually useful and we play them more than one night.

    2. Re:Understandable by johannesg · · Score: 1
      Great. Now you are assuming that because people buy less music they must therefore be stealing it. I guess you work for the RIAA?

      Has it occurred to you that those same men could simply be listening to new music less? Either because they are playing their old CD's or because they are too busy playing games? Or do you really want to make the point that these men are engaging in "income-piracy" of the poor music artists? [sarcasm]Because that is what is going on, after all: by choosing not to spend their money on CD's the artists are being deprived of their rightful income. Really, the government should step in. Maybe a special tax so everyone automatically pays the correct amount of entertainment money is in order?[/sarcasm]

    3. Re:Understandable by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

      Well... women spend the money on shoes, to find somebody worthwile to have a child with, while they meet only man normally who want to screw and them dump them :-)

      Which in the long run would indicate, that if somebody would invent artificial women the shoe industry would have a serious problem on their hands.

    4. Re:Understandable by Hast · · Score: 1

      I was considering to just mod this down but here I go and bite instead.

      Did it ever occur to you that:

      1) Anyone capable of downloading music is also capable of (or learning) to download games.
      2) There are no emulators for current gen consoles (yet).
      3) All current gen consoles have been hacked and can play copied games.

      "-1, Haven't thought think through" would be a more appropriate mod.

    5. Re:Understandable by Dash'n'SlashDot · · Score: 1

      No, I thought about those items. The current generation of games can be downloaded at gigabytes a pop and there are no good software emulators for them to be run on. Yes, all the current consoles can be hacked, but it isn't all that widespread since, in most cases, it negates the online aspect of the consoles. ESPECIALLY on the Xbox where it hurts the most since you can no longer access Live without crashing the hacked box and having to fix it.

    6. Re:Understandable by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 2, Funny
      Minorities also spend far more money on video [g]ame purchases than caucasians.
      That's because caucasians are a dime a dozen these days.

      No, wait; I think that I parsed your sentence wrong.
      --
      Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
    7. Re:Understandable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot: Where the truth gets modded funny because it's just too hard for people to cope with the fact that they're theives.

    8. Re:Understandable by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      I think this is more of a product of men realizing that modern music sucks.

      Kids on the other hand....

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  2. Well by Sebadude · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Duh. For every game I buy I'd have to buy 4 albums to spend an equal amount of money on music.

    It's like saying that people spend more money on their house than on their car. It doesn't mean that they'll own more houses than cars in their lifetime, it just means that houses are more expensive.

    --
    Eh.
    1. Re:Well by Seumas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Duh. For every game I buy I'd have to buy 4 albums to spend an equal amount of money on music.

      Where are all of these $75.96 games you're buying?! Unless you're talking about collector's editions.

    2. Re:Well by Dash'n'SlashDot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think a better question is where you are spending $19 on a CD

    3. Re:Well by FidelCatsro · · Score: 3, Informative

      Games in the UK are 30-40GBP or close
      albums are around 7-12 GBP
      so i would say the aproximations is close and yes it is a total rip off.
      The RIAA wonder why people download music for free in the EU , Bit hint boys its because your charging us near $20 per CD but i digress.
      Yes the main reason is that games are about 4* the price

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    4. Re:Well by Seumas · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Most meat-space stores sell non-discounted CDs at between $15.99 and $18.99. More for double-dics sets. The last CD I bought that wasn't directly from a band or a very small label was $18.99 and that was in 1999.

    5. Re:Well by Echnin · · Score: 1

      Prices for a music album and a game are not that different in Japan, actually. Games tend to be a tad higher, with big-name games often starting at about 7000 yen when they're first released, and albums at 3000-4000 yen for the crap everyone wants. Other games are often 4000-5000 yen.

      --
      Lalala
    6. Re:Well by Sebadude · · Score: 2, Informative

      In Canada.

      New game with taxes: approx. $80 Canadian. New cd before taxes: $15-$20. 20x4: 80!

      --
      Eh.
    7. Re:Well by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 1

      I remember when CDs were £14.99 new, and routinely £16.99-£19.99 for stuff off the beaten path (I paid £17.99 for Daft Punk's 'Homework' in 1998). The current situation of being able to buy almost any chart CD for under £10 including postage (play.com) is a significant improvement.

      Games prices, on the other hand, have not fallen significantly at all. That said, game production prices have shot up, while production prices for music have fallen.

    8. Re:Well by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1

      I do remember that it was horrendus ofcourse at that time the dollar comparison was not as bad .. I remember ordering Foetus-Nail at HMV and having to pay about 20 GBP for it(German keyboard) ..
      Basically i would not download any music (From Itunes , allofmp3 etc) if CDs cost a resonble 5 per album and lets face it thats still a massive proffit .
      Pay the artists 2.50 , production cost of .50 per CD(lets face it thats exagerating) and 2 pure profit on each album which is amazing considering how little they do.

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    9. Re:Well by rmccann · · Score: 1

      "Where are all of these $75.96 games you're buying?!"
      In Europe
      $75 = €60

  3. God Bless P2P by FalleStar · · Score: 1, Insightful

    /me laughs at the thought of actually paying for music anymore.

    1. Re:God Bless P2P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      So, do you buy your games?

    2. Re:God Bless P2P by FalleStar · · Score: 1

      Of course I do, IMO it takes a lot more skill and hard work to create a video game than it does a CD, I'd probably feel bad ripping off a video game company.

  4. It's just a better value for the money by Immercenary_2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For the most part, games have a lot more entertainment value for the money. If I buy a CD I'm paying $20 for about an hour's worth of music (not to mention that there may only be a few good songs on it). If I buy a game, There should be at least a few hours worth of gameplay before I beat it, and most games have a multiplayer mode which means that i'll get a lot of play out of that $50 I paid for the game before I get bored with it and need a new toy :). It's simple economics really. Why pay $20 for (at best) an hour of entertainment when you could get an insanely large number of hours of fun out of a $50 game?

    1. Re:It's just a better value for the money by a+whoabot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think you're only partially right. I am a big music fan though, so...

      If you're only getting "at best" an hour of use out of a twenty dollar disc, you're not listening to the right music I'd say.

      What's the most replayable games? Something like Grand Theft Auto: Vice City(I'll admit that was pretty damn fun when I played it)? Or something you play with friends a lot, like Super Smash Brothers, or some sports games? Even if you take these highly replayable games, can you still imagine yourself playing them twenty years from now?

      Now take any good recording. How could you not still want to listen to it twenty years from now? How could you not want to listen to it, assuming your in the mood, at any time until your very death?

    2. Re:It's just a better value for the money by Seumas · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Now take any good recording. How could you not still want to listen to it twenty years from now?

      Well, you could but, you'd have to pay another $40 (on top of the original $20) for the two replacements as formats became obsolete twice in those two or so decades or the media (such as CDs) failed or degraded from age.

      Of course, the same can be said of movies. And, these days, books. The last good science fiction book I bought was $35. I read it in two days. Talk about expensive!

      Entertainment is expensive, period. It's hard to justify the costs, but we pay them nonetheless. I guess that's a good thing, because it means that the other necessities in our lives are taken care of. I've cut out the purchase of music and movies, but I still buy games and books.

    3. Re:It's just a better value for the money by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      That replay value might be the reason music isn't selling, people have pretty large collections already and no need for more music (another factor might be the difficulty of finding good music these days as the radio plays the same thirty awful songs over and over again).

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    4. Re:It's just a better value for the money by Voxus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      can you still imagine yourself playing them twenty years from now?

      What!?

      Think emulators, man! Super Metroid, Mega Man, Earthbound, Legend of Mana, Ogre Battle, Castlevania.... Honestly, why would we have emulators if we never wanted to play these games again?

    5. Re:It's just a better value for the money by oskillator · · Score: 1
      Even if you take these highly replayable games, can you still imagine yourself playing them twenty years from now?

      Well, I'm still playing Super Mario Bros.

    6. Re:It's just a better value for the money by oGMo · · Score: 1
      Even if you take these highly replayable games, can you still imagine yourself playing them twenty years from now?

      I still on occasion play NES and SNES games today. I know people who still play Atari games. In fact, in many cases, I've got more motivation to play older games because I never finished them. Or perhaps some new interesting thing has been discovered. (Finding interesting "glitches" that lead to various odd areas, for instance... this happened in Metroid.)

      Even aside from this, there's just as much reason to replay a game as there is to listen to music again or read a book again. Nostalgia is a wonderful thing.

      --

      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

    7. Re:It's just a better value for the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nintendo NES classics. 20 year old games, re-released and still cool. Xevious rules!

      Granted, I'm only 24. But just last week I played the first computer game I ever had again, and I had fun:
      http://ostermiller.org/ladder/download.html
      That's a 15 year old game. So I probably will play UT2004 for an evening once a year or so come 2025, I 've certainly regularly played Doom for the last 11 years.

  5. it's not the money it's the units by generalleoff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not really fair to use money as a basis for this. Games tend to cost 3 to 5 times as much as a music CD so it's no shock guys are spending more money on games as games can make more money while still selling less units.

  6. $35 bongo controllers... by goodenoughnickname · · Score: 3, Funny

    Where do all the people who bought Donkey Konga fit into all of this?

    Oh wait a minute... nobody bought Donkey Konga.

  7. Nope by MyLongNickName · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    No you wouldn't. A thief is a thief.

    Bring on the "flame" mods. But I think this is "insightful".

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    1. Re:Nope by vadim_t · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Eh, don't overgeneralize, please.

      I couldn't care less if tomorrow the RIAA goes completely bankrupt, and Britney (or whoever is popular these days, I don't know) is found on the street gathering food from garbage cans. It's not like music will suddenly disappear in that case. There will still be modarchive.com and the Unreal Tournament soundtrack.

      On the other hand, I'm very much interested in seeing nice companies like Moonpod prosper and make more nice stuff :-)

      You know, the fact people decide to infringe some law doesn't mean they can't be selective. And no, it's not theft, dammit.

    2. Re:Nope by neumayr · · Score: 1

      LOL, you get modded insightful for stating that you think your post is insightful?

      At least I can't think of another reason..

      --
      Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
    3. Re:Nope by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1

      The post I replied to refers to it as "ripping off". Therefore, the author acknowledges that it is theft, even if you disagree. Therefore, he is a thief by his own admission, not by my accusation.

      In my experience, if a person will steal from someone, he will steal from me as well. Once you step over lines in some situations, it becomes easier to cross over them in others.

      Take a look at some "good" folks, like Martin Luther King, who engaged in multiple affairs, Bill Clinton who did the same, or Richard Nixon (if you are interested, take a look at the stuff the Kennedy's did that helped push him over the edge).

      So, I stand behind my statement. I did not make it about anyone but the original poster, so, no, I don't think I overgeneralized.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    4. Re:Nope by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1

      Maybe someone else has had the same life experience as me. When I see someone lie to someone else, I know I can't trust that person. When I see someone take advantage of a situation, I know he will do the same to me if he has the chance. I condense this to "a thief is a thief"

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    5. Re:Nope by FalleStar · · Score: 1

      So I'm a thief because I download music? I personally don't consider that a thief. My favorite artists (Twiztid, ICP, pretty much anyone under Psychopathic Records) I have no problem buying their CD's, those I can listen to all the way through over and over again. But most albums today have 1 or 2 good songs on them and the rest suck. I'm not about to pay $12-$15 for 1 or 2 good songs. If the artists want MY money they can put togther a decent album. But buying a CD for those select tracks would be more like them ripping ME off. And I would feel bad ripping off video game companies also for the fact that I've had a passion for video games since literally the age of 2 (yes I'm a young'n I know). So I'd appreciate it if you'd keep your statements/oppinons to yourself. Thanks

    6. Re:Nope by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1

      Awwww. you want me to keep my opinions to myself? And you come to a public forum with almost 900,000 registered users? Methinks your logic is not the best.

      And as far as the artist putting together decent albums, try iTunes. And if you DON'T find it on iTunes, no one holds a gun to your head and makes you fork over the money.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  8. so? by Rs_Conqueror · · Score: 0, Redundant

    New music CD = $28.99

    New videogame = $49.99

    Do the math...

  9. For me... by terrisus · · Score: 3, Funny

    Gender: Male
    Time I spend listening to music per week: 0 Seconds
    Time I spend playing video games per week: More than 0 Seconds

    That was easy.

    1. Re:For me... by Voxus · · Score: 1

      Time I spend listening to music each day: six to ten hours
      New music I've downloaded this month: No RIAA licensed content.
      Non-RIAA music I've downloaded: Mostly stuff from http://www.ocremix.org/

      Time I spend playing games each day, including console games: six to ten hours

  10. Other way around actually... by GrnArmadillo · · Score: 1

    I don't pirate any music because it isn't worth the albeit slim possibility of a lawsuit for way the heck more money than that music is possibly worth to me. As a result, I don't try out new music the way I used to when my *ahem* "friend" in college who pirated lots of music was around, and thus I don't find out about any music to go and buy. Thus, any non-zero video game spending > my music expenses.

  11. I've done this for years by Mr.Dippy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think the total amount of music I bought since 2002 has been about 3 cds. I average about 1 new game every 2 months. I don't buy games when they first come out because 50 dollars is way to much. You can buy a quality game for 20-30 bucks and the entertainment time for any given game is at least 10-15 hours. Unless I really like a cd (which has about an hours worth of music), I usually listen to a cd 3 to 4 times and then put it away in my collection. I'll listen to it maybe a couple of times a year after that. I think entertainment wise videogames give you more bang for the buck.

    --


    -Dipster
    1. Re:I've done this for years by dommer2029 · · Score: 1
      I totally agree with those who argue that music is overpriced. I think $1 a track is too high, when you compare it with the value provided by games and DVDs.

      My solution? Join BMG. The selection isn't unlimited, true, but I get albums for about $8 shipped (on average), which is 50-75 cents a track.

      --
      VFX is more influential than you think.
    2. Re:I've done this for years by Mr.Dippy · · Score: 1

      I would agree with this but I'm not crazy about BMG's selection. Every now and then they have some good cds but it seems they are just trying to push off Best of collection cds. Also, it's not a bargain unless you buy in bulk (more than 3 I think). Most of the time I just want one cd.

      --


      -Dipster
  12. Principles by Radius9 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I used to buy something like 3 or 4 CDs a week, back in hayday of Napster, mainly because I was exposed to new artists I hadn't heard before at 0 cost, after which I would buy other CDs of them. After Napster was shutdown, that dropped to about 2 CDs a month, at the most. Once the RIAA started suing individuals, I decided I was not going to buy any CDs any more, and have bought 1 CD direct from the artist in the last 2 years. I have spent WAY more than that on games. I buy more games than I do CDs, just volume wise, not even counting the price differential. Most of my friends also don't buy much as far as CDs are concerned, albeit for most of them its not on principle.

  13. ocremix is just as illegal as allofmp3 in USA by tepples · · Score: 1

    Non-RIAA music I've downloaded: Mostly stuff from http://www.ocremix.org/

    Except that everything on ocremix.org is probably considered pirated because they don't pay the royalty of up to 8.5 cents per downloaded track to the video game publishers, who own copyright in the musical works that underlie the recordings available on ocremix.org.

    1. Re:ocremix is just as illegal as allofmp3 in USA by Dash'n'SlashDot · · Score: 1

      At Overclocked Remixes, the mixers take commercial work and change it making it their own. This is legal because they aren't selling their works. allofmp3 is making money of someone's original(well, as original as popular music is anyways) work and selling it to others without the permission of the said artists or their representatives(RIAA).

    2. Re:ocremix is just as illegal as allofmp3 in USA by tepples · · Score: 1

      At Overclocked Remixes, the mixers take commercial work and change it making it their own.

      The owner of copyright in a musical work has the exclusive right to authorize sound recordings, except as part of a royalty-based compulsory licensing scheme.

      This is legal because they aren't selling their works.

      But they are still reproducing phonorecords of sound recordings of copyrighted musical works. Have you done a full fair use analysis of OCR's situation using all four factors, or have you looked only at the non-profit nature of the venture? If the latter, then it's likely copyright infringement, potentially subject to statutory damages even if actual damages are zero.

  14. Buying Muzak by tepples · · Score: 1

    Time I spend listening to music per week: 0 Seconds

    Are you trying to tell me you didn't buy food in the past week? Most grocery stores have some sort of music playing over the speaker system. The royalties for such music ultimately come out of the price of the groceries you bought. Therefore, you indirectly paid to hear music.

    1. Re:Buying Muzak by Washizu · · Score: 1

      Time I spend listening to music per week: 0 Seconds

      Are you trying to tell me you didn't buy food in the past week? Most grocery stores have some sort of music playing over the speaker system.

      He's deaf and blind you asshole.

      --
      OddManIn: A Game of guns and game theory.
  15. Wait! Wait! I know the RIAA's response! by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

    Clearly, this is the work of internet piracy in a post-9/11 world. We will now sue people for not buying music.

  16. my data point by MORTAR_COMBAT! · · Score: 1

    Last year in music, I bought 6 CD's (around $15 per) and about 100 iTunes. Let's round that up to $200 to make it easy.

    Last year in games, I bought World of Warcraft ($50) and a 3-month pre-paid card ($45). Let's round that up to $100.

    --
    MORTAR COMBAT!
  17. here here by drjenk · · Score: 1

    I will vouch for that

  18. Games have more integrated sound these days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    back when computer games just had simple sound effects that played through the pc speaker, I'd listen to lots of music while I played. Nowdays the gameplay relies on your being able to hear the audio of the game, and I listen to less music.

  19. We're not the Target Audience by hal2814 · · Score: 1

    I'm a 25 year old male and I feel that the recording industry has mostly ignored my musical tastes for about six or seven years now. Last year I bought 1 album (Bowling for Soup). I bought 2 albums 2 years ago, but they were both older music (Talking Heads and Human League).

    There are very few newer bands that I like. The older bands I like are not producing new music that I enjoy. Also, when new music comes out that I do enjoy, it gets VERY little radio play in my city. I end up finding songs I like in movies nowadays far more often than I find them on the radio.

    If the recording industry wants my money, they're actually going to have to do their job. They need to release music I like and find a way to get me some exposure to the music so that I know it exists. That is what they're there for.