Support NeoGAF

[Monk]

http://media.cube.ign.com/articles/664/664497/vids_1.html

This should please gaf until the real NPD numbers come

The problem in Japan:

Installed base:

Installed base versus penetration.

 

[Kon Tiki]

I posted a month ago.

http://www.ga-forum.com/showthread.php?p=2197609#post2197609

 

[Amir0x]

installed base vs. penetration? The fuck is that supposed to mean.

 

[Monk]

It means how many consoles were sold versus how many households have one in America.

So there are more multi console gamers than before, but about the same level of households.

 

[Kon Tiki]

installed base vs. penetration? The fuck is that supposed to mean.

It is population growth vs installed user base. The industry, or 'potential gamers', is growing faster than the number of system sold.

 

[stone128]

It is population growth vs installed user base. The industry, or 'potential gamers', is growing faster than the number of system sold.

MONK! This is wrong isn't it?

The industry really haven't reached out to a new audience since the NES days, only more people are buying more consoles and games

 

[Amir0x]

It is population growth vs installed user base. The industry, or 'potential gamers', is growing faster than the number of system sold.

Right, I'm just assuming that it's only logical that would be the case since population grows at a much faster rate than videogames ever could in any scenario.

 

[Kon Tiki]

Right, I'm just assuming that it's only logical that would be the case since population grows at a much faster rate than videogames ever could in any scenario.

Well, of course. I was just explaining what he meant by penatration. Can not have a powerpoint presentation without some outlandish 'facts'. :lol

 

[Monk]

Penetration = % of housholds with one, just like HDTV penetration.

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&lr=&oi=defmore&defl=en&q=define:Market+Penetration

 

[Amir0x]

Well, of course. I was just explaining what he meant by penatration. Can not have a powerpoint presentation without some outlandish 'facts'. :lol

Heh, well I was just wondering if they had another angle on it because that seems to be a pretty silly way to present a case for this issue. I assumed it was what you said but that sounded weird, but I guess that's the way it goes.

 

[stone128]

Nevermind, I didn't look at the numbers. 52 is too low for an installed userbase of consoles...

 

[Monk]

Its just for the us not world wide.

 

[stone128]

Its just for the us not world wide.

Then it all makes sense again!

thanx mate

Edit: Looking at thse numbers, I can understand Nintendos statements. A market who doesn't expand itself is never a good thing, stagnation rears its ugly head which pretty much is the case here.

Good thing people are buying more consoles and games to "make up" for this though... but it is kind of unsetteling. In a geeky way.

 

[antipode]

The household claim is really kind of dumb. A HUGE chunk of video gamers are people in their 20s. When they lived with their parents as teenagers it counted as one household with a video game system. Now that they've moved out on their own, there are now 2 households - their parents who don't play video games and the kids who do, so the penetration of video games drops to 50% with no negative impact to the industry.

Here's the downward trend in household size from census.gov:

_____All_______One__Two___Three___Four___Five
Year households person persons persons persons persons

2004 112,000 29,586 37,366 17,968 16,066 7,150
1996 99,627 24,900 32,526 16,724 15,118 6,630

 

[stone128]

The household claim is really kind of dumb. A HUGE chunk of video gamers are people in their 20s. When they lived with their parents as teenagers it counted as one household with a video game system. Now that they've moved out on their own, there are now 2 households - their parents who don't play video games and the kids who do, so the penetration of video games drops to 50% with no negative impact to the industry.

Here's the downward trend in household size from census.gov:

That mixes things up a bit...

It makes sense; the people who played NES in their youth are in their twenties now... such as myself.

Theoretically, the penetration may have increased as much as 50% without showing up statistically, taken that into account... though all people in their twenties probably haven't moved away from home ... It's probably somewhere close to 25 perhaps even 30 % (uneducated guess)

 

[Monk]

The household claim is really kind of dumb. A HUGE chunk of video gamers are people in their 20s. When they lived with their parents as teenagers it counted as one household with a video game system. Now that they've moved out on their own, there are now 2 households - their parents who don't play video games and the kids who do, so the penetration of video games drops to 50% with no negative impact to the industry.

I am confused what are you trying to argue?

Theoretically, the penetration may have increased as much as 50% without showing up statistically, taken that into account... though all people in their twenties probably haven't moved away from home ... It's probably somewhere close to 25 perhaps even 30 % (uneducated guess)

No it cant. Each household is a potential target for a product. That is what the graph is based on. I think what you are thinking of is the physical number of people with consoles, yes that has gone up. But those without have also gone up. So market penetration has stayed the same. You have to also consider death, new gamers etc, etc. Penetration is much more than the 20 year old that leaves mom and pop.

 

[Striek]

Comparing a finished generation to one which still has potential to increase its userbase by 5mil+ presents a skewed version of the truth.

Its plausible that the penetration could be higher at the end of this gen.

Edit; They also don't mention what year the penetration figure for the generations are. PSOne was selling in 2003 so they should use that year's household figures which would already put this generation ahead. Very creative use of figures supporting their reasoning for the Revolution, IMO.

 

[antipode]

I am confused what are you trying to argue?

Reggie's claim is that the percent of people who play video games in the USA has not increased over time. His evidence is that if you take the total number of households in 1996 and divide by the number of households with a video game system you get the same percent as in 2004. His reasoning is bad and he is using statistics to tell a lie.

That is because the average number of people per household has dropped 4% since 1996 in this country. The trend is that the children of baby boomers moved out of the house, got married and are starting their own families now. There is both a larger percentage of empty-nesters now than in 1996, and if you follow the people who played video games in the 80s or 90s, alot of them are in their own household right now or even a household with kids who play videogames.

When you go from
1996: Parent who didn't play video games living in a house with a kid who does
2005: Parent who doesn't play videogames lives in one house; their kid lives in another house with their grandkid who also plays videogames and possibly a spouse who plays video games

Guess what? The %of households who play video games drops, even though the number of people who play videogames has increased.

 

[Monk]

Comparing a finished generation to one which still has potential to increase its userbase by 5mil+ presents a skewed version of the truth.

This is true

Its plausible that the penetration could be higher at the end of this gen.

There is no doubt about it, it will. But by how much? Certainly not more than 5-10 percent.

Edit; They also don't mention what year the penetration figure for the generations are. PSOne was selling in 2003 so they should use that year's household figures which would already put this generation ahead. Very creative use of figures supporting their reasoning for the Revolution, IMO.

Uh, The installed base is just the number of units sold for each gen. The market penetration is just simply the number of households with atleast one console versus the total number of households.

 

[Monk]

The %of households who play video games drops, even though the number of people who play videogames has increased.

You are assuming that that the parents aren't a possible customer. The reverse could also be said, if a parent AND son plays video games and the kid moves out, they both have households with video games so the % goes up. The idea is that any group of people that can own a house is a possible target.

 

[elostyle]

Christ, it is install base versus household penetration. If household penetration goes down while install base goes up, that means a higher number of people have more than 1 console but the number of players is actually going down. ZOMG, not that hard.

I think he explained the same graph during his e3 presentation.

 

[WindyMan]

It was at Gamers Summit last month, actually. Same stuff, same graphs, really.

Reggie and Nintendo are going around and shopping their philosophy pretty hard. The more people they can convince, the easier it'll be to sell the concept of Revolution to the public.

 

[PhoenixDark]

:lol :lol :lol

Month old.

 

[Fuzzy]

It was at Gamers Summit last month, actually. Same stuff, same graphs, really.

Reggie and Nintendo are going around and shopping their philosophy pretty hard. The more people they can convince, the easier it'll be to sell the concept of Revolution to the public.

And those graphs were at TGS in September before that.

 

[mckmas8808]

It was at Gamers Summit last month, actually. Same stuff, same graphs, really.

Reggie and Nintendo are going around and shopping their philosophy pretty hard. The more people they can convince, the easier it'll be to sell the concept of Revolution to the public.

This is the real truth. Nintendo makes you forget that they actually made consoles in these "Losing" generations. If what they are saying is true then they helped this losing cause.

 

[Kobun Heat]

I think there's some confusion as to what this means. The graph is showing number of consoles sold; the white graph imposes on it is showing % of households with a game system.

The point is that even though more consoles are being sold, the % of households with a game system has held steady.

Reggie's interpretation of this is that growth in the games industry is not down to finding new audiences: it's about population growth and ownership of multiple consoles (which was far less common in the 8-bit days).

 

[elostyle]

I think there's some confusion as to what this means. The graph is showing number of consoles sold; the white graph imposes on it is showing % of households with a game system.

The point is that even though more consoles are being sold, the % of households with a game system has held steady.

Reggie's interpretation of this is that growth in the games industry is not down to finding new audiences: it's about population growth and ownership of multiple consoles (which was far less common in the 8-bit days).

I tried to explain that above but I'm not as good with words as you are

I think the argument is very valid, for the record.

 

[antipode]

Kobun/Elostyle - I'll try explaining again -

1996: 3 baby-boomer families, each with a kid. Only family A has a video game system.
% of households with a video game system: 33%

2005: The kids move out of the house, go to school, live in apartments of their own. Family A's son buys a next gen system - he's been playing games since he was a kid. But now, Family B's daughter, who's never played games before, becomes a gamer and she buys a system.
% increase in next-gen system sold: 100%
% increase in people playing video games: 100%
% increase in multi-console homes: 0%
% increase in population: 0%
% of households with a video game system: still 33%

Does that make sense? Households split up over time - in the last 8 years the size of the average household has dropped significantly, because of the kids of baby boomers. So even if you have more people playing games, the percent of households playing games will actually drop.

 

[Gahiggidy]

Nice graphs!

 

[Drensch]

Kobun/Elostyle -...will actually drop.

But we have a larger increase in those not gaming. Potential gamers,not gaming in B,C and the descendants of B and C. So the market is only really keeping pace.