NPD: 72% of US played games in '07, online gaming still 'small'

by Alexander Sliwinski { Apr 2nd 2008 at 6:00PM }

NPD's new "Online Gaming 2008" report states that 72% of people in the US played games in 2007, up from 64% in 2006 (although the quantity of play isn't defined) and half these people say they play online. The PC was the dominant platform for 90% of online gamers, consoles came in with 19% and the humble cell phone with 3%. Of the console owners, 50% said they used Xbox Live and the data showed they spent the most time playing online per week (followed by PC and PS3). The survey was conducted using a sample of 20,240 members of the NPD Consumer Panel.

Overall though, NPD's data shows online gaming is still "small compared to offline gaming." Only 13% of online gamers spend 20 hours or more per week playing. Online gaming is also currently driven by kids, with 40% of online gamers being under the age of 18. Interestingly, according to NPD's data, multiple console ownership in the US is very low. Only 3% of respondents said they owned two current gen consoles (yes, that includes Wii), while only 2% owned all three.

Tags: npd, online-gaming-2008, report, study

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Bryan Young @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:03PM

online hasent hit the big time yet.

Bryan Young @ Apr 3rd 2008 12:25AM

sorry im just in a really happy mood. its been a good day for me. sorry for being myself

Bryan Young @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:04PM

forgot this but WHOOP FIRST POST!

LaughingTarget @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:05PM

It's actually the second.

Neebs @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:28PM

You got the first post.

And?

Curtis the Claw: Brawl Code 1075-0441-3284 @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:36PM

Does it seriously make you feel good to say that you are the 1st poster? Hopefully it does, because it makes you appear like a fucking idiot.

ChooChooCharlie (Brawl: 1504-5357-9285) @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:39PM

How does this happen?

Is seems to come in waves. We are good for a couple of weeks or more. Everyone is posting normally: trolls are trolling, fanboys are defending, and samfish is being, well, samfish.

Then, in a single day, all of these asshats come out of the woodwork and kick off the comment thread of every other post with "FIRST POST!!!11!!!".

Is it just the same handful of people becoming unbanned? Or is that the race of the perma-banned have a generation interval of exactly 13.5 days and it takes 12 or so hours to teach their offspring to register with Joystiq and carry on the legacy of their forefathers?

Or maybe I just happened to click on the same posts as they did today. I don't know.

LaughingTarget @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:04PM

"Online gaming is also currently driven by kids"

We knew that just by listening to voice chat.

Brian @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:07PM

"Online gaming is also currently driven by kids, with 40% of online gamers being under the age of 18"

How do they figure? 60% of online play must then be by someone over the age of 18.

ILPC @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:53PM

hmm, weird, unless there was a large percentage who declined to state their age...

embassy @ Apr 3rd 2008 12:29AM

yeh i didn't get that...how is online gaming "driven" by a minority of people?

Nigeria: Cody ChesnuTT Defense Force @ Apr 3rd 2008 5:19AM

Well, say the under 18s are between the ages of 12-18, and the over 18s are between 18-40. And the under 18s number 40%. Wouldn't you say that the under 18s are the driving force as they are in the minority but still command such a health percentage.

I can see where they are coming from.

Leobebes @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:15PM

Seriously I really don't understand how online gaming is still significantly smaller? Is it the time consuming and addictive qualities of online gaming that "adults" shun, or are adult Americans un evolved cavemen who still cannot graps the basics of online gaming and possible setting up a router for their console online gaming?

Gun Barrier (=Gamer Tag) SSBB: 3952-6696-7009 @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:19PM

i think u hit the nail perfectly.

Mills and Boom @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:48PM

My free gaming time is split between TF2 and Pokemon Pearl, and whilst I can see the fun and stuff in TF2 I can also see why it isn't as big as 360 owners (assuming) make it out to be.

I'm on a 2mb connection yet I still get lag from foreign servers. Plus some people like to spoil games by being a twat in team games, abusing the mic and messaging bits. Most of the time I'd much rather play a good story rather than a series of bouts online too.

Looking over the 2 highest rated games and they don't have an ounce of an online feature... 1 of them doesn't even have any form of multiplayer!

ChooChooCharlie (Brawl: 1504-5357-9285) @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:49PM

I'm sure that's part of it. But also remember that not everyone likes multi-player (which basically constitutes all of online gaming).

If you were to look at my game collection you would notice that single-player only games outnumber multiplayer-included (or MP exclusive) games about 9 to 1. I, for one, prefer single player gaming over multiplayer for a number of reasons including: the story, not having to depend on others to play, and the fact that I can exploit the CPU controlled characters and enemies at times. I'll admit, that I feel like a bigger/smarter person when I can completely waste a CPU enemy that would normally be difficult except for a certain strategy or exploit that works well against them.

Or it could be due to the fact that CPU enemies don't usually T-bag you or call you a homo.

jorojoserojas @ Apr 2nd 2008 7:53PM

Some of us just prefer single player experiences. I dabble in online gaming every once in a while, but I am primarily a single-person gamer.

Mr Khan @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:25PM

So, wait, 50% of that 19% of that 36% play Xbox Live?

Nappa says "There's no way that could be right!"

Actually, does sound about right

John McPoop @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:40PM

I have been saying this for a while... I like online but I still prefer a good single player campaign with a compelling story... Online can help the game have more staying power but when its the main focus the game falls short IMO

Leobebes @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:45PM

For certain games like RPG's and action adventure (platform) games you are absolutely correct, with shooters and strategy games I prefer equally as good or better online functionality than their single player campaigns. In the end though going online is much more exciting than playing RPG's or action adventure games IMO. There is more of a rush.

John McPoop @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:55PM

Yeah thats a good point... Bioshock for example was a great game and deserved accolades... If it had an online component with the plasmids I would probably still be playing it now... So for shooters your right but a good story and campaign is still the reason I buy any game...Even a game like Madden or MLB 08 has to do more in the season or career mode than just let me play the game... I need more than just gameplay... Funny thing is I actually enjoy UT3 quite a bit which has the worst campaign of all time...Its a death match against the computer with a few cut scenes... But the mods add something different.... I will take a game like Uncharted or Bioshock with great story and gameplay over a game like frontlines or UT3 that is just basicly an online game... what would be cool is if there was a shooter that was an MMo like Huxley is supposed to be or that Tabula Rusa (?) that combines a story with the gameplay in an online world... Even though FPSMMO games have not done well traditionally

Kodros @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:56PM

@Leobebes - Not everybody is constantly looking for a rush. It's nice to be able to relax and play an offline game at your own pace without some fucko yelling at you.

Kodros @ Apr 2nd 2008 6:57PM

John, The Agency for the PS3/PC has potential.

John McPoop @ Apr 2nd 2008 8:23PM

@Kodros

Thanks I have not heard of that one but I will keep an eye out for it... Appreciate the tip!

Vcize @ Apr 2nd 2008 7:17PM

Uh, yet another useless statistic taken out of context.

The stat is that only 13% play MORE THAN 20 HOURS per week online. That's not to say that 13% of people play online and 87% play offline.

I'd like to know what the number is for people that play more than 20 hours per week offline. I'd imagine it's an equally small number, because I highly doubt that more than a third of the people that play videogames out there play more than 20 hours per week.

Minoring in stats ruined these kinds of articles with obvious holes in them for me.

Vcize @ Apr 2nd 2008 7:27PM

Ok seriously, the more I think about this the more it bothers me.

They really should have either given us that number with regards to people that play 20+ hours offline, or they should have given us the percentage of players that spend at least half their time or a third of their time online or something.

I'm going to go publish a report that says that less than 1% of people play games offline for 100 hours per week and reason that my finds are "OMG NOBODY PLAYZ OFFLINE EVERY1 LOVEZ TEH ONLINEZ!!".

Seriously, 20 hours per week for strictly online games is a pretty high number. That's 3 hours per day if you play EVERY day. Miss a day or two and we're talking 4-5 hours per day. I would consider myself a pretty hardcore online gamer (I'm on every night after the wife goes to bed) and even I struggle to keep up an average of 20 hours spent online per week.

Really, that 13% number is awfully high given the criteria.

Gurei @ Apr 2nd 2008 7:36PM

games are still laggy as hell,got stiff options for your speed and arent flexible.

I point to thee, WOW.
Prime example of how online games should work,tune down the system and turn off adons and works with dial up,wana play it seriously get a 2k speed.

Now if SSBB workd with any speed....that would be diferent story.Same with halo,etc.

Curmeo @ Apr 2nd 2008 11:46PM

"The survey was conducted using a sample of 20,240 members of the NPD Consumer Panel."

epic fail right there.

Nigeria: Cody ChesnuTT Defense Force @ Apr 3rd 2008 5:13AM

The thing that caught me was the fact that ownership of two next generation consoles was only at 3%. While ownership of all three was at 2%.

It clearly shows that all the posters here who own, or claim, to own more than one system are in the minority.

Most rational people choose one console, and if the price decreases on a competing console then they may choose an alternative.

So my point is: stop making sucky Wii ports.