Core Gamers Mostly Male, Casual Gamers Mostly Female, Says NPD

[Fappy]

-Snip-

-Snip-

Quoting both of you since you're making pretty similar points. I agree that publishers shifting focus to appeal to a wider audience is usually a bad thing, but I fail to see how this means they are trying to appeal to casual gamers. The definition of "casual" we are using in this context refers to those that play phone games every now and don't engage themselves with the community in any meaningful way. I see a lot of people lambaste the Madden/CoD gamers as the source of the problem, but I think it's fair to say that a lot of those people are very passionate about their hobby. They may not be as invested as we are, but some of them still pump hours upon hours into the games they play and talk about them on social media and with friends all the time. When the discussion of "being a gamer" comes up, many of them may identify themselves as such and even I would feel a little uncomfortable with that, as regrettable as that is to admit.

I don't think you two are pointing any fingers, but I think the focus needs to be shifted from the "casual" gamers themselves to the publishers that are failing to connect with their core audience. In the end, it's those companies that are failing us, not the frat boy playing Madden or the stay-at-home mom playing Farmville.

I hate to be "that guy" but... well, actually I don't care if I'm "that guy". People who play CoD and to an extent people who casually play mobile games are causing the watering down of franchises that List and I described. This doesn't mean I support them being attacked or yelled at in any way, but they are a cause of the issue. Now, obviously the true party at fault are publishers/developers trying to make both their long running franchies and their new franchies simplier and more plain in an effort to appeal to these people, and if anyone should change it's those two groups of people, but saying CoD plays or casual gamers aren't at fault at all isn't logical.

They have impacted this sure, but what exactly are they guilty of? They're buying and playing what they want to. Can you really fault someone for that? I don't think so.

 

[Internet Zen Master]

5 or more hours per week counts as "heavy core" these days? Pfft. Pitiful. I spend at least 12 hours a week just raiding in WoW let alone more leisurely play.

No, before people freak out I don't think that makes me better or "more" or a gamer than anyone else. Just that 5 hours seems piddly to me.

Yeah, having 5 hours being the minimum for 'heavy core' does seem rather pitiful. I reach that within a day when I'm in a gaming mood. Granted, I'm not playing games on a constant basis, but the fact that I can reach that 5 hours a week bar without much effort means that the bar to justify as "heavy core" (which is a strange concept. Are we trying to split up the various subsets of the 'hardcore' gamer now?) should probably be closer to VanQ's gaming time.

 

[Inglorious891]

-Snip-

-Snip-

Quoting both of you since you're making pretty similar points. I agree that publishers shifting focus to appeal to a wider audience is usually a bad thing, but I fail to see how this means they are trying to appeal to casual gamers. The definition of "casual" we are using in this context refers to those that play phone games every now and don't engage themselves with the community in any meaningful way. I see a lot of people lambaste the Madden/CoD gamers as the source of the problem, but I think it's fair to say that a lot of those people are very passionate about their hobby. They may not be as invested as we are, but some of them still pump hours upon hours into the games they play and talk about them on social media and with friends all the time. When the discussion of "being a gamer" comes up, many of them may identify themselves as such and even I would feel a little uncomfortable with that, as regrettable as that is to admit.

I don't think you two are pointing any fingers, but I think the focus needs to be shifted from the "casual" gamers themselves to the publishers that are failing to connect with their core audience. In the end, it's those companies that are failing us, not the frat boy playing Madden or the stay-at-home mom playing Farmville.

I hate to be "that guy" but... well, actually I don't care if I'm "that guy". People who play CoD and to an extent people who casually play mobile games are causing the watering down of franchises that List and I described. This doesn't mean I support them being attacked or yelled at in any way, but they are a cause of the issue. Now, obviously the true party at fault are publishers/developers trying to make both their long running franchies and their new franchies simplier and more plain in an effort to appeal to these people, and if anyone should change it's those two groups of people, but saying CoD plays or casual gamers aren't at fault at all isn't logical.

They have impacted this sure, but what exactly are they guilty of? They're buying and playing what they want to. Can you really fault someone for that? I don't think so.

I completely agree that they aren't the ones that need to change since they caused the issue just by existing, but in the end their presence is what caused publishers to want to cater to them. They are the cause of the issue, but they shouldn't go away to fix the issue due to how insane and impossible making a few million people dissapear from the view of publishers would be.

 

[VanQ]

To no ones actual surprise

People have been wanting this to change for years for some reason or other, but we're not there yet, I'm going to give it another decade or two before there's a fairly even split between the two genders in the part of the gaming circle we perceive as the "core"

All the hate towards gamers from people outside it leads me to believe we'll have to wait at least two decades, it's become less stigmatizing than before to be interested in what was before considered "boy hobbies", but there's evidently still a large portion of the population who view gamers as fat neckbeards who dislike girl cooties

maybe its the result of sexual dimorphism, and girls naturally are less willing to commit to this kind of hobby and be less competitive

or maybe thats my inner manpig speaking so dont quote me on that

if we want the stats to change there must be more games designed for women, and i dont mean simply having a female protagonist, kinda like otome games in japan

hell certain kinds of casual games might be just that

btw im not implying that girls cant enjoy "hardcur" games as well, of course they can, im just talking about tendencies

The funny thing about this is that by my experience, when a girl "picks up" the hobby of gaming, and I mean more towards the core titles than facebook stuff, they tend to get more competitive, display more agency (they don't ask "what do you want to do today and hope you guess right they actually tell you what they want) and also display a greater drive in bed. It may just be circumstantial evidence having witnessed two girls behave like this in my life but apparently I'm not the only one to have noticed it.

 

[Madame_Lawliet]

Oh fuck the "core vs. casual" argument, it does nothing but build more walls in a community that's already got enough walls to make Roger Waters jealous. Who's to really say what a "core" game or a "casual game" is anyway, and who's to say what a "gamer" is at this point either? I don't call myself a "gamer" anymore, and I just finished beating Dark Souls for a fifth time.
So fucking what if a chart says that ladies tend to game more "casually," it doesn't mean you can keep on pretending that gaming audiences aren't expanding and progressing. They are, and games themselves should be evolving with them.
Honestly, I'm entirely in favor of retiring the word "gamer" permanently, I've been saying that "gamer" is a stupid, negative, exclusionary, othering term for the better part of a decade now.

 

[WouldYouKindly]

To the surprise of absolutely no one.

Hey, maybe the influx of casuals will have a positive effect on the industry. After all, it doesn't take a massive development team to create a mindless cow clicker that can make serious bank off of a stupidly small amount of actual work. This means a smaller dev could pay the bills with a stupid, wallet emptying game so they could make something they really want to make.

Is there such a thing as hopeful cynicism?

It's a good thing I like a fair few niche games. Try to "broaden the appeal" of a niche game and you pretty much lose your entire audience and probably don't gain anything. I don't think you could get too many casual gamers to sit down and play a game of CKII.

EDIT: A bit more on the whole war over the gamer title. I consider gamer to be a subset of enthusiast. You could use a looser definition, but if you insist on calling yourself that, you're probably an enthusiast. Applying the term to people who wouldn't use the term to describe themselves seems a touch disingenuous. There are people who read books(myself) and there are people who are reading enthusiasts(my mother, who has read books non-stop for as long as I can remember).

So let anyone who wants it have the title of gamer. Start calling yourself a gaming enthusiast, because that's more accurate and closer to the truth. I think we all qualify. That's why we're here.

 

[Callate]

I think what's notable is the definition "casual gamers play only non-core games" (emphasis mine.)

By this definition, there are no "casual gamers" living in my house, and I live with my wife and daughter.

I'm not trying to say casual gamers are somehow worse than core gamers. But a distinction drawn on such a sharp line seems like a pretty steep cliff to simply ignore.

 

[blackrave]

Sick of these overly broad stroke surveys. Would be much more interested in data relating to specific genres or games.

i.e what's the male/female split for FPS vs MMO. How many people surveyed stick to franchise triple A games and how many branch out and play other titles/indie games? What percentage of people surveyed play Minecraft as their main game?

Can't remember where but in one thread another research came up with genre % split between gender
No surprises there though, except strategy genre
My beef with it was that X-Com and Farmville could both be considered "strategy", but, obviously, one is unlike the other.

Spoiler: found it

I feel like I should paste this here so people get a better idea how the male/female demographic is split up.

Some Notes:

Football is soccer
Voitures is Racing
Cartes is Cards
Autres is Others

People say that females are only large because of social games but it actually is fairly evenly split. Sure, there is more groups that favor males over females but it isn't as big as people might think.

Sadly no links provided so take it into consideration

 

[Amaror]

Cool i didn't know that the nazi party of germany does research on game sales as well. Everybody has to have a hoby i guess.

 

[Carnagath]

5 or more hours per week counts as "heavy core" these days? Pfft. Pitiful. I spend at least 12 hours a week just raiding in WoW let alone more leisurely play.

No, before people freak out I don't think that makes me better or "more" or a gamer than anyone else. Just that 5 hours seems piddly to me.

Yeah, was thinking the same thing. So if I play for example half an hour of Dead Trigger 2 on my phone every night before I sleep, that makes me a "heavy core" player? Would be interesting to see the numbers and spending habbits of especially the people who play 15-20 hours a week or more. Although I guess if you bunch them up with the casual hordes who tap on their Clash of Clans mines twice a day, then the percentage would be minuscule.

 

[Charli]

The PC numbers don't surprise me at all. There are a lot of women on MMO's, which holds a huge marketshare of the PC scene. The only genre I can think of where they are in the extreme minority is MOBA's because, well... their communities, I imagine.

Sad but true. I like mobas but ... The harassment and hostility (despite the team's meant to be working together) isn't worth my mental power in the day or my increasingly valueable time.

 

[josemlopes]

Why is it I get the feeling at least one person is going to use this as justification as to why we shouldn't care about women in gaming.

Its all about the consumer base, if there are a lot more male core gamers for FPSs then there really isnt much point on catering to the female audience (although the optional playable female character in multiplayer never hurts), if there are more female core gamers for MMOs then there isnt much point either in catering to the male audience (no need for every female character to be a Maxim model and have the login page with a sexy painting of a female character). They can still tackle those points like Perfect Dark for FPSs and the fact that some girls also like their female characters sexy but they really dont need to push that if it isnt that important to them.

That is why in that whole "but they are casual" argument there is some point to it, a lot of casual games are targeted to the female audience, meaning that the gaming industry is actually aware that females do indeed play games and the games they play the most are already made to appeal to them.

EDIT: There is also nothing wrong in making a game with the purpose of in a way introduce said demografic to a new genre that most of them arent really a fan of but there trully is no point in saying that every game must be marketed and try to appeal for both when its obvious that some people simply wont like it.

For all I know boys would like a game like the Barbie Horse Adventures if it was around a Navy Seal and his long training to beat the terrorists, but there really is no point in trying to make boys actually want to play Barbie Horse Adventures.

 

[Phasmal]

The reason being, "core videogames" still tend to aim directly to the straight male demographic, while "casual videogames" tend to be much more open to be all-oriented or even female-oriented.

/endofdiscussion

No no no it couldn't possibly be THAT!

Women must just have a `not a real gamer` gene. It's very sad.

OT: Five hours a WEEK? Five hours a DAY! Get on my level, scrubs.

Oh fuck the "core vs. casual" argument, it does nothing but build more walls in a community that's already got enough walls to make Roger Waters jealous. Who's to really say what a "core" game or a "casual game" is anyway, and who's to say what a "gamer" is at this point either? I don't call myself a "gamer" anymore, and I just finished beating Dark Souls for a fifth time.
So fucking what if a chart says that ladies tend to game more "casually," it doesn't mean you can keep on pretending that gaming audiences aren't expanding and progressing. They are, and games themselves should be evolving with them.
Honestly, I'm entirely in favor of retiring the word "gamer" permanently, I've been saying that "gamer" is a stupid, negative, exclusionary, othering term for the better part of a decade now.

Also this, I'm not sure why we're so fascinated with dividing ourselves, especially down gender lines.
Seems a little weird to me.

 

[Lil_Rimmy]

The real question is, with all of the many casual games, and all of the casual gamers playing them, why do we still lean on this crutch of refering to this other class of games as the "core?"

Seriously, it would be like a guy from Mississippi walking around Kenya talking about how it's amazing there are so many "minorities" there...

You will rue the day that Yahoo Dominoes is considered a "core" game.

Denial doth not an argument make. If most of the people playing (and paying) are casual, that's the new core. If most of the folks in this country voted for Ron Jeremy for president, he'd be president. Doesn't matter if the wizened few think it's a dumb idea.

Now, me? I don't think casual games are some awful thing. Clearly, their existence isn't removing classically "core" games from existence. And I play a handful of goofy games on my phone, which I enjoy greatly. There's just this weird idea that even though MOST gamers play these casual games (which includes but is not limited to stuff like Yahoo Dominoes), the other section of games are still the "real" thing.

The real reason casual games do so well, in addition to being convenient, is that they have broader appeal. Candy Crush, the bajillion versions of Yahtzee and Boggle, Hay Day, you know something they all DON'T have in common? The same old gravelly-voiced white male protagonist.

You do realise when most rational people refer to casual gamers (hint: the difference between rational and idiots are the ones that follow up casual with "for n00b scrubs fags") it's because when they game, they do it as a casual thing, ergo the name casual game or casual gamer.

You don't sit down with a drink and snack to prepare for a lovely long marathon of Angry Birds, but you would do so for Skyrim. Even playing Skyrim compared to some kind of phone based puzzle game has the comparison of one being a time consuming event that is the entertainment itself, whilst the other is a simple time waster or something that you do for a short while, kind of like someone who doesn't watch TV putting on The Simpsons in the background.

The reason most people would make this comparison with video games compared to say, TV or movies is that most video games require a modicum of effort to play, as such the difference between someone who does it as a time waster and someone who does it for a full on hobby is very different compared to other methods of entertainment.

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

5 or more hours per week is considered heavy core? I play 5 hours or more a day.

 

[Strazdas]

so basically confirmed what was already done more expensively by other researchers. well, more and newer data is always welcome, though NPD methods are highly questionable as they always were. at least this time they didnt lump all gamers together. small steps....

What you're getting it is saying that the type of game is defined by how it is played. If that be the case, then people that play "core" games, but only do so casually, should be termed casual gamers. And people that play silly puzzle games for hours at a time should be classified as "hardcore."

erm, sim is definatelly a core genre. simulation is as hardcore as you can get if done properly. whne you think about sims dont think about farm simualtor or surgery simulator. think about X3, Hearts of Iron, Europa Universalis, Racing simulators, Euro Truck simulator, ect.

Oh and i have met hardcore puzzlers. damn they are good at it too.

What's weird is, as far as I can tell, you don't see this kind of divide in nearly any other kind of "nerdy" hobby. You like tabletop? Cool. The worst you'll see are people condemning certain systems because they don't like the rules, not because the audience doesn't have any less passion for the hobby than they do. How about comic books? Marvel/DC rivalries are like console rivalries: irrelevant and not a real issue. Beyond that, I don't really see any kind of line in the sand drawn between "real" and "fake" comic book readers.

I wonder why that is... :/

Sports. there is clear divide between hardcore hooligans fans and just a casual viewer.
Cars. There is a big difference between car enthusiaasts rebulding thier cars and a guy that just drives it to work.

Oh and those two are very nerdy hobies. Its just that they are old enough to become "normal".

5 or more hours per week counts as "heavy core" these days? Pfft. Pitiful. I spend at least 12 hours a week just raiding in WoW let alone more leisurely play.

No, before people freak out I don't think that makes me better or "more" or a gamer than anyone else. Just that 5 hours seems piddly to me.

ech, you should have seen their last survey. played a game for 30 minutes during last month? your a gamer!

there is. we call them "summer blockbusters".

not to mention that people tend to forget at one time ALL games were "casual". from space invaders to pac-man and missile command. despite what people claim a specific game isnt hardcore its the obsession of the person involved, hence why missile command record breakers still make the news

ID argue that missile attack, the first videogame created, was never casual. in fact just weeks after its inception it was banned in all research labs because technicians played it too much during work and wasnt doing the job (back then only lab computers could run it so it was the only way to play it). it was also the first game to create a gaming tournamen - before home consoles even existed. These people were seriuos about it.

maybe its the result of sexual dimorphism, and girls naturally are less willing to commit to this kind of hobby and be less competitive

A survey done on priorities during free time between sexes a couple years back shown similar results. essentialy for most males gaming was either first or second on the importance scale, whereas for females it was closer to 4-6 place after other things. So basically what this shown is that females just have different priorities and gaming isnt as high as for males, thus they often devote less time to gaming.

 

[giles]

.... where are the actual numbers? Did I miss the link to the results on the npd.com page? What the hell is "mostly" supposed to mean? "Heavy Core" means over 5 hours a week, but how many actual hours are spent on gaming by the "Heavy Core"?

What's the point of this press release? Either give us the results or don't, those half-baked articles are how rumors and myths get started.

 

[Verlander]

...does this mean I'm female? Wow. I never knew.

Just FYI, In order to qualify as a core gamer for the survey, respondents had to currently play Action/Adventure, Fighting, Flight, Massively Multi-Player (MMO), Racing, Real Time Strategy, Role-Playing, Shooter, or Sport games on a PC/Mac.

Interesting that they consider the PC a core platform over console or mobile device. I'd imagine the inclusion of these platforms would alter the results pretty drastically.

 

[veloper]

5 or more hours per week is considered heavy core? I play 5 hours or more a day.

They might as well not have made the distinction between "light core" and "heavy core" at all here, since both categories of gamers play the same games in this survey.

It doesn't make any difference if I buy Blobs and play it every evening, or just for a couple hours and put it on the shelf forever. It's still one game sale.

Which demographics buy what and for how much, is the only thing that matters, to people who make or market games.

 

[Karadalis]

Quoting both of you since you're making pretty similar points. I agree that publishers shifting focus to appeal to a wider audience is usually a bad thing, but I fail to see how this means they are trying to appeal to casual gamers. The definition of "casual" we are using in this context refers to those that play phone games every now and don't engage themselves with the community in any meaningful way. I see a lot of people lambaste the Madden/CoD gamers as the source of the problem, but I think it's fair to say that a lot of those people are very passionate about their hobby. They may not be as invested as we are, but some of them still pump hours upon hours into the games they play and talk about them on social media and with friends all the time. When the discussion of "being a gamer" comes up, many of them may identify themselves as such and even I would feel a little uncomfortable with that, as regrettable as that is to admit.

I don't think you two are pointing any fingers, but I think the focus needs to be shifted from the "casual" gamers themselves to the publishers that are failing to connect with their core audience. In the end, it's those companies that are failing us, not the frat boy playing Madden or the stay-at-home mom playing Farmville.

The problem is that publishers AREN'T actually trying to appeal to "casual" gamers. They keep pushing these big spectacle-fests and bragging about how much money they've pumped into them. If anything they seem to treat the "casual" scene with contempt and don't really have any interest in expanding their audience. They just keep pandering to the same, steadily-shrinking audience they've catered to for decades.

On the other hand they are also not catering to the hardcore gamers, cause most of these spectecal fests are piss easy shallow experiences.

So the question is: Who are the latest spunkgargleweewee titles aimed at?

Sometimes the tripple A industry seems to me like the most expensive fast food industry. Massive expenses, no replayability, and games that last less then 8 hours.