Gaming at the Geritol Age

An anonymous reader writes "There's an interesting opinion editorial over on GameDaily.com about all the recent reports regarding the age of gamers, and what it all might mean - if anything - to the hobby." From the article: "When I tell someone that I write about video games, I typically get a pretty enthusiastic response. The few who have looked down on me for having such a job 'at my age' aren't so much numerically older than I am as they're older in mind and spirit. Take for instance my neighbor. I honestly think he considers me less of an adult for playing videogames 'at my age.' That's fine. I think he's odd in general, so we're even. I've been playing video games in one form or another since 1977. That's the majority of my life now. But I'm not alone though. Things are changing in the world of video games. I guess the best way to put it is: it's growing up. I'm not talking about the industry itself, but rather those who actually play the games."

Comments

Gaming: Not just for kids anymore

[TheJediGeek]

This is along the lines of something that's been floating around in my mind lately.
Video games started out mostly for kids. There weren't too many adults that played video games when they were first catching on. Now the "kids" that were playing video games in its infancy are adults and many haven't stopped playing video games.

However, the video game industry hasn't seemed to figure this out for the most part. Sure, there are "mature" games out now, but most of them appeal to the "barely legal" adult demographic. There are many gamers pushing 30 or older and probably wouldn't enjoy GTA:Ultra Hooters! too much.
Instead, the gaming industry seems to still be focusing on teenage gamers.
There are some valid reasons for this, and I'm not arguing those. However, as years go by and more and more people over 30 have grown up with video games, the industry really can't afford to continue to ignore this demographic.

Not to beat a dead horse, but Star Wars Galaxies is a great example. The game started out very in-depth with plenty of options for just about anyone to find something they liked. Now, it has been dumbed down to a VERY BAD wannabe FPS action game with nothing to do except "kill, loot treasure, repeat." They chucked out a game that should have been perfect for what should have been their target market (Most serious SW fans are 25+) in favor of a game to try (badly) to appeal to the younger "instant-gratification" crowd.

I think I'm starting to ramble so I'll stop now...

Re:Gaming: Not just for kids anymore

[badasscat]

nstead, the gaming industry seems to still be focusing on teenage gamers.
There are some valid reasons for this, and I'm not arguing those. However, as years go by and more and more people over 30 have grown up with video games, the industry really can't afford to continue to ignore this demographic.

I wouldn't say the industry is ignoring this demographic, but it probably is underserved. Still, games like The Sims appeal to the 30-and-up crowd, IMO, as do titles like Star Wars: Empire at War, and of course there's all those classic compilations and remakes, not to mention new stuff like Katamari Damacy that's in that classic gaming vein. (And hopefully will introduce a new generation to what real video gaming is like...)

But the main reason I think this demographic is maybe disproportionately represented on store shelves compared to the slew of ultra-violent, ultra-sexed up games for the barely legal crowd, is probably a simple one: while most game buyers are in their late 20's and early 30's, most game developers are at least half a decade younger. You can blame it at least in part on the notorious working conditions that the industry still suffers, where 12 hour days are considered a vacation. That's fine when you're just out of college, but get yourself married and settled down and very few people are going to continue living that life.

And it's true that games for the barely legal set do sell. But as titles like The Sims show, games for "the rest of us" can sell even better. But developers can only develop what they know, and given a choice between developing "Game A" for the college-age crowd or "Game B" for the gaming geezers, they'll choose "Game A" every time. Management will go along, because they know games like that have been profitable in the past, whereas games for the older demographic don't have as long of a track record.

The solution is really to try to keep us old guys making games in the industry (I used to be part of it too), and that means changing a lot of bad corporate habits; really a whole corporate culture. It's probably not going to happen. But unless it does, the industry is leaving a whole lot of money on the table, if you ask me.

btw, guys like Peter Molyneux, who have been around for decades, are the exception rather than the rule.

Generation Gap...

[Vellmont]

There's obviously nothing about video or computer games that makes them inherently part of youth culture. The problem is that anyone say over 45 only saw kids playing them when they came out, so they just assumed it was a kids thing. None of these people have friends that play video games (since I'd bet most of them don't have friends under 38 or so), and the only people THEY see playing them is their kids.) They of course assume that videogames are a kids thing, even though that's obviously incorrect. Any person they hear of that plays videogames must be some kind of weirdo, since in their mind videogames are like playing with childrens toys.

Many people live rather sheltered lives outside the things they personally experience. As an example: recently I was talking about taking off my front bike tire to mount it on my car rack, and my 66 year old mother looked like I was from another planet. They didn't have quick release when she was a kid, and she hasn't ridden a bike for probbably 30 years. Even though quick release has been popular for at least 20 years, and you see people using it fairly often it was alien technology to her.