NY Times examines changes in the gamer market

by Alexander Sliwinski { Feb 1st 2008 at 3:30PM }

The New York Times has taken a look at the NPD's list of top ten selling games in 2007, which shows mass-market games mixed in with games designed for the "young-male audience." As the industry matures and becomes more popular, the "hard-core gamers" and "old-school critics" are becoming just one small part of a very large $18 billion pie.

The NY Times makes its case by observing the absence of critically hailed single-player experiences (like BioShock or Mass Effect) from the top ten, now filled with accessible multiplayer games like Halo 3 and Call of Duty 4. In fact, nine out of the top ten games actually have a multiplayer component (Assassin's Creed is the black sheep). The NYT concludes that people want "human contact in their entertainment" and gaming's mass acceptance comes from being able to have others join in the fun.

A reasonable conclusion, albeit one that oversimplifies matters. While the social elements of most of these games certainly form part of the appeal, the top-selling games also offered compelling solo components. Why choose between single and social gaming when you can have both?

[Thanks, Farseer]

Tags: change, demographics, diversity, expansion, growth, nytimes

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

naxe @ Feb 1st 2008 4:23PM

thank you nintendo for making the dedicated gamers a mear bug on the windsheild. now we have no weight to throw around anymore. for every bioshock. COD4. Halo3 we buy 50 mario galaxies gets sold. no problem with that except the mario story has been told. save peach

cant wait for hello kitty super cute friend's sing-a-long 2! (not a bash to any system; just saying nintendo is playing to the casual gamers and casual = popular, mindless games and whats more mindless then hello kitty?)

another lame sony joke how wounderful. so your gonna turn your back on the (delaystation) and buy a RRODstation instead. why dont you just join the bandwagon and buy a wii. it will only collect dust for one more month. then the software is really gonna get going. and the balancing board is gonna be killer.

BTW i have all three systems. don't have a favorite. Ps3 has been the best investment so far. allowing me to do whatever i want. Hack and homebrew wise.

TiredRiver @ Feb 1st 2008 3:36PM

I believe there is a whole lot of truth to the theory.
I love single player games but for me the true value is multiplied by 10 when there is a MP component, plus the fact that games are just more fun when played with other people.

Also I disagree with the blogger with respect to the single player on Halo having a super campaign: it was adequate at best.

Shimrra @ Feb 1st 2008 3:40PM

You have to see it from a perspective of someone who has never really sat down and played video games Halo 3 could be probably be the bees knees as they would say but for experience gamer we all know that Halo's story line is pretty shallow and would probably be nothing with out its great multiplayer gameplay.

copa @ Feb 1st 2008 4:14PM

I think the author was stretching a bit to make his points.

I played both Halo 3 and Madden 08, and I found them to be very complex games. Keep in mind I have played at least ten previous iterations of Madden, and a bunch of (non-Halo) FPS games, and for me these games had a very steep learning curve to get comfortable with the controls.

I think these are both hardcore games for young males, not games with broad, casual appeal like Guitar Hero, Mario Galaxy, or Wii Play.

OTAM @ Feb 1st 2008 3:36PM

Single player >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Multi-player

Single player is the plot,dialogue,character development,pacing and everything else. Single player FIRST,then multiplayer second after you're completely satisfied with the solo campaign.

GRANTED @ Feb 1st 2008 4:02PM

time spent playing multiplayer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> single player.

there must be a reason.

OTAM @ Feb 1st 2008 4:09PM

Maybe for you GRANTED,but me,I go back and beat single player games multiple times.

My girlfriend has beaten the game Fatal Frame like 7 times and the same here for Gears of War.

Mr Khan @ Feb 1st 2008 4:15PM

I'm with OTAM here, even though i'm a Nintendo fanboy and people have always gravitated towards them for party games, i still focus a good 80% of my gameplay on single-player (before the advent of Online play, it was closer to 95%)

Fire Emblem, Kirby, main Mario games, Metroid, Zelda, Sonic, various Star Wars games, and more recently low-profile stuff like Z&W and NMH

Smash Bros, Mario Kart, and Bomberman are probably the only dedicated multiplayer games that i've ever gotten into (or were remotely good at against human players)

I've always lacked the dynamic thinking to beat human players, especially in FPSes, i completely fail those multiplayer

Shimrra @ Feb 1st 2008 3:36PM

Hopefully with reporting like this we can see a better form or media attention given to the proper aspects of gaming.

Britton @ Feb 1st 2008 3:49PM

Maybe developers will start creating titles focused primarily on the multiplayer aspect of gaming after seeing this. i.e. Team Fortress 2.

Deck @ Feb 1st 2008 3:59PM

Focused primarily on the multi-player?! EEEEK!

Don't get me wrong, multi-player is an important aspect but to forget the single player is horrible! HORRIBLE! Maybe its just me and how single-player RPGs are my absolute obsession and love for games (Oblivion+Mass Effect is wonderful) but to actually go away from single player and not care about it much anymore is horrible.

Perhaps you could say well maybe a few titles could start focusing mostly on the multi-player. The problem with that, is that it opens the door for all games to start doing that and focus mostly on the multi-player. That door of possibility shouldn't be opened in my opinion.

Overall its just, to think about my beloved single player (loved Assassin's Creed though many did not plus many others) could go away completely (its already gone away enough!) is a catastrophe!

Caleb Andrews @ Feb 1st 2008 4:24PM

I totally understand what you mean, Deck. I too am the same type of player you are (I adore my RPGs, MMO's, and whatnot) and asbolutely loved Assassin's Creed, but I still think there needs to be some titles that are strictly multiplayer. I'm not at all insinuating that we strip games of their single player aspects, but create games that are geared ONLY towards multiple players. Team Fortress 2 was a fantastically made multiplayer title that did well as a standalone and could serve as an example to all developers!

Courtney Farr @ Feb 1st 2008 4:31PM

I would like to see a greater focus on cooperative, multiplayer gameplay. Going through a great (or even okay) story with a friend > same story by myself (usually).

Anam @ Feb 1st 2008 4:34PM

I think the Orange Box is a perfect example of what games should be like. A single-player only game, puzzle game and multiplayer-only game in the same box. None of them tried to be something they weren't just to appeal to the masses, yet the package as a whole appealed to everyone, regardless of taste.

On the other hand, I would love to play Shadowrun, but I don't play multiplayer games often enough to want to purchase it. Likewise, someone who mostly plays multiplayer might be interested in Bioshock but wasn't sure how much they'd actually play it. But if someone took Bioshock and Shadowrun and put them in the same box, we would see massive sales for Shadowshock.

Caleb Andrews @ Feb 1st 2008 4:39PM

Hahaha, Shadowshock...+1 to you, my friend...

Saria the Cat @ Feb 1st 2008 4:48PM

Video games are something that people play on their free time. I don't know about you, but the older I get, the less free time I have to play. Multiplayer requires not only your free time, but the free time of others. I have enough trouble finding time to play games by myself without having to coordinate my free time with others in order to play multiplayer games. Single player should always be a priority for games (that aren't the multiplayer genre, such as Mario Party, etc.)

KayRazyKen Kutaragi @ Feb 1st 2008 3:53PM

Guess Im going to buy a 360 then since they have the best online and best multiplayer experiences out there.

Praise be to Xbox360!!

Fernando Rocker @ Feb 1st 2008 3:56PM

You know is true.

Fernando Rocker @ Feb 1st 2008 3:58PM

And this is specially for you... enjoy it =)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggoK85c4NQc

KayRazyKen Kutaragi @ Feb 1st 2008 4:02PM

Fernando buddy Im serious, I wasnt being sarcastic. I want to see what all this hype is about. Im tired of waiting on MGS and FF. FRACK Sony and its Delaystation3!

KayRazyKen Kutaragi @ Feb 1st 2008 4:04PM

Truly funny Fernando =)

NATO_Duke @ Feb 1st 2008 4:16PM

Warhawk is a great MP title I have to admit. I even had my fiance's father playing it last month. Call of Duty 4 is also great on either system.

Beyond that, the delays in titles like FF are depressing.

ComicShaman @ Feb 1st 2008 4:18PM

Ah. I see what you did there. Took out the space to make "KayRazyKen" rather than "KayRazy Ken."

The world makes sense again.

eugene @ Feb 1st 2008 4:07PM

I think the analysts just don't get it. Games and gamers always had a multiplayer/social side. Modern gaming began in the arcades, where your scores were posted for the world to see, where people could stand behind you and witness your skills and challenge you if the fancy struck them.

It's just that only recently has the technology caught up to allow that sort of interaction and community again, but this time from the comfort of our living rooms. We haven't "discovered" community, we've been pushing for it, dragging our boxes to each other's homes. Fiddling with cables and protocals... we've always appreciated community and now we're just enjoying what's possible. Now we're not limited to standing over each other's shoulders and putting quarters down on the cabinet to mark our space. Now we can play against the whole world.

Anam @ Feb 1st 2008 4:11PM

Here's my argument for why multiplayer games outsell singleplayer games:

A player buys a Mass Effect. His friend is also interested in Mass Effect but doesn't buy it because he knows that his friend will get done with it then let him borrow it.

On the other hand, multiplayer games can be played together, but only on the condition that each player buys a separate copy, with the exception of split-screen multiplayer games.

Also a big factor is that games like Call of Duty 4 and Assassin's Creed are on multiple systems, unlike Bioshock or Mass Effect, which are only on one system AND lack multiplayer, restricting sales for two reasons.

Caleb Andrews @ Feb 1st 2008 4:34PM

FAN-TAS-TIC point. I've proven your argument/point by recently borrowing a copy of Assassin's Creed from my little brother's friend considering I wasn't about to drop 60 bucks on playing a game that I'll only play to beat then toss it out. On the other hand, we have two 360's at my house with two copies of Call of Duty 4...why is that, you may ask? Because we love our multiplayer action. ;)

Anam @ Feb 1st 2008 4:41PM

Yep, that's the way things go. Another example is my life: within my circle of family and friends, we have a grand total of one copy of Final Fantasy X, yet everyone I know has played it. On the other hand, we have four copies of StarCraft, despite half of my friends not liking strategy games.

I think Pokemon has a good idea really. A singeplayer game that allows you to trade with friends who also have the game. If they let us trade weapons and items with our friends in Final Fantasy X, you can bet we would have more than one copy.

Vidikron (FU) @ Feb 1st 2008 4:44PM

Yes, very good point. I think what more "single player" games should start doing is incorporating co-op.

Farseer (GDI) @ Feb 1st 2008 5:09PM

I honestly just about crapped my pants when I read this article. I can't remember a video game analysis in a major news publication that wasn't full of blatant inaccuracies and outright falsehoods.

Nate @ Feb 1st 2008 6:29PM

I agree. It was pretty well thought out and shows a lot of knowledge of the industry (quoting metacritic, accurately talking about Mass Effect and Bioshock). However, I think he did stretch for his points a bit much. Halo 3 and CoD 4 are certainly not "accessible" in the way Wii Sports and Mario Party are. He is totally right about multiplayer being the new big thing, though. With Nintendo being the king of same-couch multiplayer, and the 360 being the king of online multiplayer, it's very obvious the most successful games are those that get people playing with other people.

Multiplayer games are why the gaming industry is overtaking every other entertainment industry - because you don't just discuss the entertainment afterward, like a movie or a book or a TV show, but you actually participate together.

I think co-op in "single player" style games is the great middle ground, where you can still have highly plot motivated games, but get your friends in on the action as well.

Leobebes @ Feb 1st 2008 5:53PM

Bottom Line:

Since games are worth $60.00 nowadays it is important for devs to create a solid single player campaign and solid multiplayer aspects. If not in my opinion the game is worth much. Now when it comes to RPGS like Olivion, Mass Effect, and Final Fantasy available downloadable content within a one month period is a must! Oblivion has been awesome in this category. I am kinda let down that Mass Effect doesn't have any planned D/L announced yet. Consumers definitely deserve more bang for their buck.

mattclarkie @ Feb 3rd 2008 9:46AM

Anyone that claims that Halo3 and CoD4 are not games for the HardCore gamer doesn't really know much. It is true that because the games are so good people who may have passed them over buy them, but just because they have MP doesn't make them into a Casual game.

Kelsey Rodway @ Feb 3rd 2008 11:08PM

I think it’s great that group video games are becoming increasingly more popular. There is always time for a gamer to probe his or her own way through a game alone, and it is also very important to learn individualized skills. But, the “real world” is about interacting with others and how other to begin the journey than with enjoyable teamwork? The video game world is coming together rather than branching out into specific “types” of gamers. You used to have to be hard-core to play and understand video games, but now it’s just like a family movie night. Everyone plays video games now, and it’s bringing people together instead of pulling people apart, like it used to. A while ago, there were certain cliques of gamers, who only understood their own lingo. Now, it seems to be universal. The gaming world has become universal and finally, the geeks and the beauty queens can reunite.