Support NeoGAF

[Men_in_Boxes]

What I said was "From console owners I know, its between 30% and 40% female, depending on how you count it.". Your reply was "press F to doubt". I took that to mean that you doubted I was telling the truth, but apologies if that wasn't what you meant.

I wrote down a list of friends/family who I know play on the most recent generations of consoles (PS4 onwards) and it was 37.5% women, 62.5% men. Again the number could be different depending on who you do or do not count.

So we're starting to get somewhere. I've asked this question to numerous people in my life, both male and female, and your response of 37.5% (well short of the 48% Circana poll) is the outlier. Everyone else I've asked (What percentage of PS5/SX gamers do you think are female?) fell well short of 20%, let alone 37.5%.

If the Circana poll was right, shouldn't we have roughly 50% of the responses sway overwhelmingly to female? I encourage you to do this as well. I don't think it's a small sample size on my end.

The Circana poll just doesn't pass the sniff test. It feels very off.

If a poll is an amateur one, say for example on a gaming forum or social media, I don't believe it would be particularly representative. When a poll is done by a professional company such as YouGov or Circana, then I put more weight behind its results. I reviewed the methodology shared by Circana and it makes sense to me (though obviously I am not a professional pollster).

Either way, a professional poll is certainly more representative than my own personal experiences.

Dewey Defeats Truman. There are so many examples of "professional polls" that get it wrong. In my brief search online I've found that females are more likely to participate in online polling, which is likely leading to the garbage results.

Maybe the % of "core gamers" to the overall gamers is higher for men than it is for women.

Yes, this is really the only way to make the poll make sense. It's to broaden the term so loosely that it no longer has any value. Are you a gamer if you've played a PS5/SX once in the last 5 years? I'm sure most girls under the age of 20 have played Fortnite sometime in the last 7 years. Does that make them gamers?

I don't believe this to be true. I see video game commercials targeting women fairly regularly. Below are a couple of examples I've seen in the UK:

You're doing this repeatedly.

My claim is that it's nowhere near 50%. Your tactic is to say "I know plenty of female gamers" and now..."I've seen many gaming commercials geared towards the female audience."

Again, this doesn't refute my claim. If 5% of videogame commercials target females, and the other 95% target males, then you can obviously see plenty of commercials targeting girls. You do not see 50% of commercials targeting girls.

We don't have GameStop or Walmart here so I can't answer that. The cheapest way to get games here is to order them online.

I'm sure you can find the equivalent of both stores in your location and I'm sure you've no doubt noticed how heavily the customer base skews male there as well. Also, guys probably understand the price benefits of shopping online just as much as the ladies.

Traditionally gaming has been male dominated (18% of PS1 owners were women per Sony's data) and it's true a lot of games have focused on violence. But my counter point would be:

• There are popular games that don't focus a lot on violence
• Women can consume media with violence in it as well

Again...again...again...my claim is not that there are 0 female gamers. Obviously you're going to find a small number of games that don't focus on violence. But males tend to prefer violent media at higher rates than women, which is why you see the vast majority of games contain themes of violence. If the customer base was truly 50/50, we would see it reflected in the themes of games.

Counterpoint question:

When we have Sony telling investors the % of PlayStation Account owners over the age of 13 who are female, why would we ignore that information and decide its more accurate to judge the PlayStation userbase with personal, anecdotal metrics like "people I saw in Walmart" or "mentions of gaming in TV shows I've seen."

That's not critical thinking.

I bet it's to inform investors of an untapped customer base more than anything.

"Watch what they do, not what they say."

 

[Woopah]

So we're starting to get somewhere. I've asked this question to numerous people in my life, both male and female, and your response of 37.5% (well short of the 48% Circana poll) is the outlier. Everyone else I've asked (What percentage of PS5/SX gamers do you think are female?) fell well short of 20%, let alone 37.5%.

Doesn't mean that what those people think is actually accurate. If you asked those people "what % of PS account owners are female" how many of them do you think would say the right answer of 41%?

Dewey Defeats Truman. There are so many examples of "professional polls" that get it wrong. In my brief search online I've found that females are more likely to participate in online polling, which is likely leading to the garbage results.

If a poll gets a significantly higher response rate from women than men, that is something Circana adjusts for to make the data more representative of the whole population.

I'm not saying polls are perfect, there's aways margins of error. But it doesn't make sense to reject a polls findings based on lived experience. I've never met a single person who plays Roblox. Most people I speak to have never even heard of it. Does that mean the Cricana data showing the popularity of Roblox "doesn't pass the sniff test" and is therefore wrong?

No, it just means that the experience of one person, their friends, and even their friends' friends isn't necessarily representative of the whole gaming market.

Yes, this is really the only way to make the poll make sense. It's to broaden the term so loosely that it no longer has any value. Are you a gamer if you've played a PS5/SX once in the last 5 years? I'm sure most girls under the age of 20 have played Fortnite sometime in the last 7 years. Does that make them gamers?

To be included in the Circana results, the person had to have played video games within the last 30 days.

Any girls under 20 who played some Fortnite years ago would not be counted

My claim is that it's nowhere near 50%. Your tactic is to say "I know plenty of female gamers" and now..."I've seen many gaming commercials geared towards the female audience."

My tactic is to show why you shouldn't assume your own personal experiences apply to everyone else in the gaming market. You said "when you watch TV that targets the male audience, you get videogame commercials but with the opposite...you don't?" and "You do not see 50% of commercials targeting girls." as if these were facts that apply to everyone.

More than 50% of the gaming-related adverts I see target both men and women. The rest have a specific gender focus, but the number targeting men is not noticeable higher than those targeting women.

I'm sure you can find the equivalent of both stores in your location and I'm sure you've no doubt noticed how heavily the customer base skews male there as well. Also, guys probably understand the price benefits of shopping online just as much as the ladies.

I'm saying I haven't noticed because I don't really go into those types of shops. I have no idea what their customer base is and I wouldn't use that anecdotal evidence to judge the whole gaming market.

Again...again...again...my claim is not that there are 0 female gamers. Obviously you're going to find a small number of games that don't focus on violence. But males tend to prefer violent media at higher rates than women, which is why you see the vast majority of games contain themes of violence. If the customer base was truly 50/50, we would see it reflected in the themes of games.

I'm not saying that is your claim. But what are you using to judge the scale? Especially when a lot of popular games don't strongly focus on violence?

Could it have some affect? Yes absolutely. It is likely one of the factors behind the female % on PlayStation being lower than it is on Switch.

I bet it's to inform investors of an untapped customer base more than anything.

"Watch what they do, not what they say."

Surely people over 13 who have PlayStation accounts on PS4/PS5 are not an "untapped customer base". They are actual PlayStation customers. And 41% of them are female.

Again, all this anecdotal evidence from shopping or TV watching isn't going to be as representative as the actual data from Sony.

Edit: I appreciate the effort you put into the discussion.

 

[RoboFu]

I think 16bit is where it peaked for me. I could have gone on with attachments forever. Cart helper chips really widened the gap on the snes from launch games to yoshi's island.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Doesn't mean that what those people think is actually accurate. If you asked those people "what % of PS account owners are female" how many of them do you think would say the right answer of 41%?



If a poll gets a significantly higher response rate from women than men, that is something Circana adjusts for to make the data more representative of the whole population.

I'm not saying polls are perfect, there's aways margins of error. But it doesn't make sense to reject a polls findings based on lived experience. I've never met a single person who plays Roblox. Most people I speak to have never even heard of it. Does that mean the Cricana data showing the popularity of Roblox "doesn't pass the sniff test" and is therefore wrong?

No, it just means that the experience of one person, their friends, and even their friends' friends isn't necessarily representative of the whole gaming market.



To be included in the Circana results, the person had to have played video games within the last 30 days.

Any girls under 20 who played some Fortnite years ago would not be counted


My tactic is to show why you shouldn't assume your own personal experiences apply to everyone else in the gaming market. You said "when you watch TV that targets the male audience, you get videogame commercials but with the opposite...you don't?" and "You do not see 50% of commercials targeting girls." as if these were facts that apply to everyone.

More than 50% of the gaming-related adverts I see target both men and women. The rest have a specific gender focus, but the number targeting men is not noticeable higher than those targeting women.



I'm saying I haven't noticed because I don't really go into those types of shops. I have no idea what their customer base is and I wouldn't use that anecdotal evidence to judge the whole gaming market.



I'm not saying that is your claim. But what are you using to judge the scale? Especially when a lot of popular games don't strongly focus on violence?

Could it have some affect? Yes absolutely. It is likely one of the factors behind the female % on PlayStation being lower than it is on Switch.



Surely people over 13 who have PlayStation accounts on PS4/PS5 are not an "untapped customer base". They are actual PlayStation customers. And 41% of them are female.

Again, all this anecdotal evidence from shopping or TV watching isn't going to be as representative as the actual data from Sony.

Edit: I appreciate the effort you put into the discussion.

I think what it boils down to is that you trust the poll, I don't.

If the poll was accurate, we would see evidence of its accuracy in the environment. We'd be able to test it out.

Take political polling. Half the country supports D & R. We can step outside, talk to people, look at various news outlets etc and see..."yeah, about half the country goes one way, the other half goes the other way."

We can't do that with this poll. There is no evidence in the environment that supports the validity of the poll.

- We can't ask the women in our lives because they all say very few of their friends play consoles.
- We can't ask gamers because they all give extremely low female participation numbers.
- We can't look at advertising because the majority of video game advertising goes towards male dominated programs.
- We can't look at the games themselves because the majority of games center around killing enemies.
- We can't look at game podcasts because that field is dominated by males.
- We can't go to game stores and see a 50/50 customer base.
- We can't look at female centric TV/movies and see female characters playing or talking about games.

It just doesn't add up. Truth leaves evidence behind. That poll should set everyones BS meter off. I'm amazed that some people actually buy it.

 

[Woopah]

I think what it boils down to is that you trust the poll, I don't.

If the poll was accurate, we would see evidence of its accuracy in the environment. We'd be able to test it out.

Take political polling. Half the country supports D & R. We can step outside, talk to people, look at various news outlets etc and see..."yeah, about half the country goes one way, the other half goes the other way."

We can't do that with this poll. There is no evidence in the environment that supports the validity of the poll.

- We can't ask the women in our lives because they all say very few of their friends play consoles.
- We can't ask gamers because they all give extremely low female participation numbers.
- We can't look at advertising because the majority of video game advertising goes towards male dominated programs.
- We can't look at the games themselves because the majority of games center around killing enemies.
- We can't look at game podcasts because that field is dominated by males.
- We can't go to game stores and see a 50/50 customer base.
- We can't look at female centric TV/movies and see female characters playing or talking about games.

It just doesn't add up. Truth leaves evidence behind. That poll should set everyones BS meter off. I'm amazed that some people actually buy it.

The evidence comes from Sony themselves. 41% of PlayStation account owners are female (for people 13 or over). That's a fact.

So why is it so unbelievable that the gender split for PS5 in its biggest market is similar to the PS gender split globally?

Let's say your right, and the Circana result is way off and the gender split for PS5 in the US is significantly under 41% for women. All that means is either:

1. The gender split for PS4 in the US is noticeably over 41%
2. The gender split for PlayStation outside the US is noticeably over 41%
3. A mixture of both.

Maybe the women spend less time shopping for games in Walmart, talking about games with their friends and hosting gaming podcasts than the men do.

But the important part is that they are actually using a video game console.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

The evidence comes from Sony themselves. 41% of PlayStation account owners are female (for people 13 or over). That's a fact.

So why is it so unbelievable that the gender split for PS5 in its biggest market is similar to the PS gender split globally?

Let's say your right, and the Circana result is way off and the gender split for PS5 in the US is significantly under 41% for women. All that means is either:

1. The gender split for PS4 in the US is noticeably over 41%
2. The gender split for PlayStation outside the US is noticeably over 41%
3. A mixture of both.

Maybe the women spend less time shopping for games in Walmart, talking about games with their friends and hosting gaming podcasts than the men do.

But the important part is that they are actually using a video game console.

This feels like jumping through hoops to me.

It's believing the word of a sacred text without seeing evidence of its validity in the real world.

I can't believe something if I don't see evidence of it in my every day life if it's something as testable as hobby preferences among human beings.

The way I could be convinced of its validity is if you (or anyone) was able to come up with a test in order to reveal what I'mnot seeing. So far, your entire argument has been "Just trust the poll. The poll is sacred. It's blasphemous to doubt the poll."

I seek evidence of the polls validity.

 

[Lethal01]

- We can't ask the women in our lives because they all say very few of their friends play consoles.
- We can't ask gamers because they all give extremely low female participation numbers.
- We can't look at advertising because the majority of video game advertising goes towards male dominated programs.
- We can't look at female centric TV/movies and see female characters playing or talking about games.

These things haven't been true in my experience at all

and I think there is simply the case that women also like games that have fighting

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

These things haven't been true in my experience at all

and I think there is simply the case that women also like games that have fighting

I can't comprehend your reality. I've asked this question to plenty of people in online lobbies and the answer is always "O%, oh no I think Jessica plays...oh no wait...I don't know maybe 1% or 2%, something like that."

I've literally never gotten anyone to give me a number higher than 20%.

It's hard for me to believe that I've had an outlier orb floating around me my entire life.

Also, women don't like fighting as much as men.

 

[Woopah]

This feels like jumping through hoops to me.

It's believing the word of a sacred text without seeing evidence of its validity in the real world.

I can't believe something if I don't see evidence of it in my every day life if it's something as testable as hobby preferences among human beings.

The way I could be convinced of its validity is if you (or anyone) was able to come up with a test in order to reveal what I'mnot seeing. So far, your entire argument has been "Just trust the poll. The poll is sacred. It's blasphemous to doubt the poll."

I seek evidence of the polls validity.

I'm saying trust Sony's report to its investors.

When a company reports account data to investors, it has to actually use the real data. It can't just make things up.

Just so I can fully understand you position, are you saying Sony is lying? Or are you trying to say something else?

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I'm saying trust Sony's report to its investors.

When a company reports account data to investors, it has to actually use the real data. It can't just make things up.

Just so I can fully understand you position, are you saying Sony is lying? Or are you trying to say something else?

I can't trust vague data that conflicts so strongly with my, and everyone around me, personal experience so drastically.

I can be wrong on this, but I'm going to need to see a different argument other than "Trust the sacred poll that you haven't seen and don't know all the details of." I need to see the 48% number reflected in the real world.

I'm saying I don't trust the validity of the poll. I make no claims about whether Sony is lying, mistaken, or obfuscating the truth.

 

[Woopah]

I can't trust vague data that conflicts so strongly with my, and everyone around me, personal experience so drastically.

I can be wrong on this, but I'm going to need to see a different argument other than "Trust the sacred poll that you haven't seen and don't know all the details of." I need to see the 48% number reflected in the real world.

I'm saying I don't trust the validity of the poll. I make no claims about whether Sony is lying, mistaken, or obfuscating the truth.

Then let's forget about the poll for now and focus on the Sony data.

When people register a PlayStation account, they tell Sony their gender and date of birth.

This is what has allowed Sony to tell their investors the age and gender breakdown of the current PlayStation audience.

Its how we know that 15% of their are 25-30, while nearly 20% are 31-36. And its also how we know 41% are female.

This data is official demographic %s presented to investors.

That's pretty strong evidence no?

 

[Lunarorbit]

I think the argument between Woopah and Men_in_Boxes helps show the evolution of gaming.

Only a few years ago most of us would have seriously doubted the 40% female console owners. All the polls that asked if women gamed were based on mobile apps.

The fact you two are having an argument is good for our industry.

 

[Woopah]

I think the argument between Woopah and Men_in_Boxes helps show the evolution of gaming.

Only a few years ago most of us would have seriously doubted the 40% female console owners. All the polls that asked if women gamed were based on mobile apps.

The fact you two are having an argument is good for our industry.

Thank you.

Gaming certainly used to be more male dominated. Sony told investors that only 18% of PS1 owners were women.

But since then the industry has grown and the gender balance has changed.

I would not be surprised if the current gender balance on Switch is less male dominated than it was on N64.

Early adopters of consoles can be quite male dominated, but Nintendo has noted how the release of the Switch Lite and then Animal Crossing helped change that.

 

[Lunarorbit]

Thank you.

Gaming certainly used to be more male dominated. Sony told investors that only 18% of PS1 owners were women.

But since then the industry has grown and the gender balance has changed.

I would not be surprised if the current gender balance on Switch is less male dominated than it was on N64.

Early adopters of consoles can be quite male dominated, but Nintendo has noted how the release of the Switch Lite and then Animal Crossing helped change that.

Oh yeah the switch probably has the most female gamers on it, like you guys were arguing. There are easily more women devs now than ever so that's also another metric to check. That probably has hard data yall can look at

Edit: https://www.statista.com/statistics/453634/game-developer-gender-distribution-worldwide/

Says 30% of devs in 2021 are women
Up 9% in 4 years from 2017

 

[Woopah]

Oh yeah the switch probably has the most female gamers on it, like you guys were arguing. There are easily more women devs now than ever so that's also another metric to check. That probably has hard data yall can look at

Edit: https://www.statista.com/statistics/453634/game-developer-gender-distribution-worldwide/

Says 30% of devs in 2021 are women
Up 9% in 4 years from 2017

I'd have to see the source of that statista graph first, but it wouldn't be surprising to see an increase.

But in general, it's important than any analysis is using a representative sample.

From people I know personally, the % with PlayStation accounts who are women is way less than 41%. Therefore this group is not representative of the whole PlayStation community.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Then let's forget about the poll for now and focus on the Sony data.

When people register a PlayStation account, they tell Sony their gender and date of birth.

This is what has allowed Sony to tell their investors the age and gender breakdown of the current PlayStation audience.

Its how we know that 15% of their are 25-30, while nearly 20% are 31-36. And its also how we know 41% are female.

This data is official demographic %s presented to investors.

That's pretty strong evidence no?

I wouldn't call the person setting up an account, the primary player / owner of the console.

They have polls showing that slightly more than half of TV watchers are female. You can scan Netflix, Amazon, Hulu title cards for 7 seconds to see that's a believable number.

You can't do that with the PlayStation storefront. The vast majority of games on the store are so obviously geared towards the male audience.

Why would gaming be so dramatically different than TV watching habits?

Now maybe you would say women don't spend or play at nearly the same rates as men do, but they still technically play + own consoles. I guess that's plausible, but I still have a hard time believing 48% of women are spending $600 dollars on a PS5 for themselves.

The eye test conflicts too strongly for me to buy that narrative.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I think the argument between Woopah and Men_in_Boxes helps show the evolution of gaming.

I know it's just semantics, but this isn't an argument. It's a discussion/disagreement. I enjoy communicating with people of differing perspectives.

 

[Woopah]

I wouldn't call the person setting up an account, the primary player / owner of the console.

They have polls showing that slightly more than half of TV watchers are female. You can scan Netflix, Amazon, Hulu title cards for 7 seconds to see that's a believable number.

You can't do that with the PlayStation storefront. The vast majority of games on the store are so obviously geared towards the male audience.

Why would gaming be so dramatically different than TV watching habits?

Now maybe you would say women don't spend or play at nearly the same rates as men do, but they still technically play + own consoles. I guess that's plausible, but I still have a hard time believing 48% of women are spending $600 dollars on a PS5 for themselves.

The eye test conflicts too strongly for me to buy that narrative.

Why would the person setting up the account not be a player of the console in the vast majorityof cases? Especially when this only applies people 13 and over

The trouble with the "eye test" is that it is completely reliant on one's own biases. Valorat's playerbase is 30% - 40% female, is that the result you get from the eye test?

It wouldn't have been what I thought.

Just a niggling thing, but the split for PlayStation is 41% not 48%, and Sony's data covers both PS4 and PS5 users.

And yes, I agree that men spending more time/money on gaming on average than women is certainly plausible.

 

[Heimdall_Xtreme]

vs

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Why would the person setting up the account not be a player of the console in the vast majorityof cases? Especially when this only applies people 13 and over

The trouble with the "eye test" is that it is completely reliant on one's own biases. Valorat's playerbase is 30% - 40% female, is that the result you get from the eye test?

It wouldn't have been what I thought.

Just a niggling thing, but the split for PlayStation is 41% not 48%, and Sony's data covers both PS4 and PS5 users.

And yes, I agree that men spending more time/money on gaming on average than women is certainly plausible.

There's two scenarios that exist.

Scenario 1: PlayStations polls reflect reality. All my observations throughout life about console gaming and gender have been wrong. Everyone I've asked about this poll has been just as wrong. All the male oriented gaming social media, podcasters, Youtubers, Twitch streamers, traditional media etc simply represent a strange anomaly. All the marketing targeting the male audience is simply a crazy improper use of capital. It also means that the overwhelming violent themes are embraced by women in videogames alone - not TV, not music, not literature, not movies, but videogames only. It also means that while male gamers buy and play games at significantly increased rates, female gamers still purchase $500.00 dollar consoles at somewhat similar rates.

Scenario 2: The polls don't reflect reality. I have no idea why. Maybe it has to do with their ESG score, maybe it has to do with showing their shareholders potential new markets, maybe the data is simply bogus.

I legitimately can't believe anyone would believe in scenario 1.

 

[consoul]

Yes, you legitimately can't believe that a scenario that doesn't align with your personal experience could possibly exist. We get it.

Your experience (and even that of people you've asked) isn't everyone's experience.

 

[Woopah]

There's two scenarios that exist.

Scenario 1: PlayStations polls reflect reality. All my observations throughout life about console gaming and gender have been wrong. Everyone I've asked about this poll has been just as wrong. All the male oriented gaming social media, podcasters, Youtubers, Twitch streamers, traditional media etc simply represent a strange anomaly. All the marketing targeting the male audience is simply a crazy improper use of capital. It also means that the overwhelming violent themes are embraced by women in videogames alone - not TV, not music, not literature, not movies, but videogames only. It also means that while male gamers buy and play games at significantly increased rates, female gamers still purchase $500.00 dollar consoles at somewhat similar rates.

Scenario 2: The polls don't reflect reality. I have no idea why. Maybe it has to do with their ESG score, maybe it has to do with showing their shareholders potential new markets, maybe the data is simply bogus.

I legitimately can't believe anyone would believe in scenario 1.

Sorry for the late reply!

We already agree that Sony isn't lying to investors, so the ESG score and "potential new market" factors can be discounted.

So then we are left with "the data is bogus". If we look at that argument, it seems to mostly rely on observations and assumptions.

There's an assumption that video game adverts have to be on certain shows you watch in order to reach women. There's an assumption that women do not overwhelming embrace violent themes in media.

But if we look at Game of Thrones as an example, Nielsen data shows that 41% - 44% of the audience was women. Doesn't that show your assumptions aren't accurate?

So on one hand we have data from registered Playstation console owners, and two Circana surveys of 10,000+ households. And on the other we have the personal opinions and gaming habits of people you know.

Is it so unbelievable that I find the former evidence to be stronger than the latter?

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Sorry for the late reply!

We already agree that Sony isn't lying to investors, so the ESG score and "potential new market" factors can be discounted.

So then we are left with "the data is bogus". If we look at that argument, it seems to mostly rely on observations and assumptions.

There's an assumption that video game adverts have to be on certain shows you watch in order to reach women. There's an assumption that women do not overwhelming embrace violent themes in media.

But if we look at Game of Thrones as an example, Nielsen data shows that 41% - 44% of the audience was women. Doesn't that show your assumptions aren't accurate?

So on one hand we have data from registered Playstation console owners, and two Circana surveys of 10,000+ households. And on the other we have the personal opinions and gaming habits of people you know.

Is it so unbelievable that I find the former evidence to be stronger than the latter?

!!!

I wish you asked me about Game of Thrones without telling me the Nielson data because every woman I've talked to over the last 10 years has binged the show.

I kid you not, my "eye test" assumptions would have been dead on the money with GoT. I assume the gender split among younger people would be close to 50/50 and then the older you got, the more male oriented the audience would skew. 41 - 44% is a completely reasonable figure to me.

Isn't it interesting how accurate the eye test is in one area (GoT) but not the other (female PlayStation owners)?

It's almost as if something stinks here.

 

[Woopah]

!!!

I wish you asked me about Game of Thrones without telling me the Nielson data because every woman I've talked to over the last 10 years has binged the show.

I kid you not, my "eye test" assumptions would have been dead on the money with GoT. I assume the gender split among younger people would be close to 50/50 and then the older you got, the more male oriented the audience would skew. 41 - 44% is a completely reasonable figure to me.

Isn't it interesting how accurate the eye test is in one area (GoT) but not the other (female PlayStation owners)?

It's almost as if something stinks here.

But then if every woman you know has binge watched the show, why did you say that women don't embrace violent themes in TV?

And why is it that you trust data ftom Nielsen but not Sony or Circana?

I agree that something stinks, and that's the "eye test" no? Since it got GoT split right but the gaming split wrong.

I'm just struggling with why your personal eye test would be more accurate than both Sony and Circana. And given that our personal experiences are different, what makes your eye test right but my eye test wrong?

(Thanks for indulging me by the way).

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

But then if every woman you know has binge watched the show, why did you say that women don't embrace violent themes in TV?

I don't think women watched GoT for the violence (at least at nearly the same rate men did). I think they watched GoT for the politics / drama. The cake had multiple ingredients that captured multiple demographics.

And why is it that you trust data ftom Nielsen but not Sony or Circana?

Because some polls stink and others don't. We have to trust our eyes and ears to some degree.

I agree that something stinks, and that's the "eye test" no? Since it got GoT split right but the gaming split wrong.

Nah, it's that poll. The idea that 45% of PlayStation players are female makes no sense. If it were true, the PlayStation store would more closely resemble the key art you see on Netflix / Amazon Prime. 20 seconds of scrolling shows that a sizeable percentage of the audience is female there. On the PS Store it's 95% swords, guns, and explosions.

What does your personal eye test say about GoT? Do you honestly believe that just as many women watched GoT as play/own a PlayStation?

I'm just struggling with why your personal eye test would be more accurate than both Sony and Circana. And given that our personal experiences are different, what makes your eye test right but my eye test wrong?

I would need to see all the details surrounding the poll. Unfortunately, it's very vague and they don't like giving all the details out.

(Thanks for indulging me by the way).

The pleasure was all mine.

 

[lakitu1982]

Why not have a poll on here asking if you are male or female?

 

[consoul]

Why not have a poll on here asking if you are male or female?

The male/female split of this forum, or of Twitch or YouTube streamer viewers or discord communities or all the other periphery doesn't equate to who is buying consoles and playing games.

 

[nkarafo]

In what universe 50% of console/PC gamers are women? Mobile phones, yes, but in no way it's that high for other systems.

Source: Me, living on planet Earth watching the world around me.

Gaming certainly used to be more male dominated. Sony told investors that only 18% of PS1 owners were women.

18%? PS1?? Like nearly 1 every 5 PS1 gamers were women? In the mid 90's???

"Only"?

Did i wake up in a different dimension recently or something?

Can i ask, how old were you in 1995/96? Do you actually really believe that BS?

18% might be the real percentage today but even that seems very high to me. I would guess 15% max.

 

[Woopah]

I don't think women watched GoT for the violence (at least at nearly the same rate men did). I think they watched GoT for the politics / drama. The cake had multiple ingredients that captured multiple demographics.

And its the same for gaming too no? Not all games have violence, and even those that do often also have multiple ing story, puzzles, exploraiton etc.

Nah, it's that poll. The idea that 45% of PlayStation players are female makes no sense. If it were true, the PlayStation store would more closely resemble the key art you see on Netflix / Amazon Prime. 20 seconds of scrolling shows that a sizeable percentage of the audience is female there. On the PS Store it's 95% swords, guns, and explosions.

What does your personal eye test say about GoT? Do you honestly believe that just as many women watched GoT as play/own a PlayStation?

Circana and Sony's data has it at 41%, but there's always a margin of error so it could by more like 38-39% or semthing like that. That would make sense.
So I just went on the homepage of PlayStation Store to do an "eye test" and these would be my results:

Games where I don't see the female % being as high as GoT

Borderlands 3
NHL 24
Street Fighter 6
Gollum
Star Trek Resurgence
FIFA 23
40K Boltgun
Isle of Man 3
Resident Evil 4
Earth Defense Force 6
Conscript
F1 Manager 24

Games where I think the female % could be as high as GoT

Roblox
Minecraft
Balatro
Dredge
Hogwarts Legacy
The Last of Us
Theatrythm Final Fantasy
Tchia
Octopath Traveller II
A Space for the Unbound
Demon Slayer
Darkest Dungeon
Kunitsu-Gami

So the eye test tells me there are games women would enjoy.

What I would say is that, when it comes to the increasing female % of console gaming, a lot of companies have responded by adding more female characters or more women in their markeitng, rather than changing the type of games they actually make.

Nintendo have been actively making a vartiety of games for both genders, and that's why they have a higher gender % and acheve notbaly higher software sales than most other publishers. The eshop does look more like Netflix/Prime.

I would need to see all the details surrounding the poll. Unfortunately, it's very vague and they don't like giving all the details out.

I would say they went into a pretty good level of detail when explaining their methodology. What makes you say its "very vague?"

 

[Woopah]

18%? PS1?? Like nearly 1 every 5 PS1 gamers were women? In the mid 90's???

"Only"?

Did i wake up in a different dimension recently or something?

Can i ask, how old were you in 1995/96? Do you actually really believe that BS?

18% might be the real percentage today but even that seems very high to me. I would guess 15% max.

I was 6 at that time.

Its not that you live in a different world, its that the people an individual knows are not always representative of the widing gaming community. For example, the number of gamers I know playing free to play games is less than 10%. Clearly that is not the case for people who play console games as a whole.

That's why we need to look at data rather than anecdotal evidence (which is what "Me, living on planet Earth watching the world around me" is).

 

[nkarafo]

Its not that you live in a different world, its that the people an individual knows are not always representative of the widing gaming community

It's not hard, it's my hobby and obsession, i know what's going on in the game world, it's not like i don't know what happens outside my own space.

Back in the mid 90's there was less information but you could figure out what happens by going to school every day, hanging around with other gamers, hanging around in arcades, going to video game rental clubs and video game stores, reading every game magazine that gets printed including imported ones from other countries, watching TV shows about games and just being invested in the hobby in general. I even befriended a few game rental club owners, we would trade games all the time and they would let me hang around and play games in their stores for hours, even help them around with work so i can rent a game or two for free. You want to ask me how many of their customers were women gamers?

Is all that "anecdotal"? So what.

As someone who was 15 when the PS1 was at it's peak i can assure you that in no way 1 every 5 console owners in the mid 90's were women. Sony were just bullshitting their investors if they actually ever proposed them that.

That's why we need to look at data rather than anecdotal evidence (which is what "Me, living on planet Earth watching the world around me" is).

There's no need for data when something is so big and well known/obvious. Certainly not the kind of data that cooks their own results and narrative. Like how they could count all mobile phones as gaming devices so everyone who has a phone is now a gamer. Or count someone who plays solitaire to kill time in the office.

Experience is all the data you need in some cases. Do you need data to know there's no way 50% of construction workers are women?

I never understood this obsession of forcing the idea that women are into video games just as much as men. What happened? Is it because video games are now cool or something? You know it's fine if women don't care as much, it's not like playing video games is proof of virtue or something. It's just a stupid hobby.

 

[consoul]

Is all this "anecdotal" to you?

That is the very definition of anecdotal, yes.

 

[nkarafo]

That is the very definition of anecdotal, yes.

Doesn't mean it's wrong.

 

[R3EUIL]

It's funny to think that games in the past were made to sell consoles, engage with the platform and get people to buy more games for their consoles. Nowadays, games are made to get as much time out of you as possible, which is why I consider Fortnite to be possibly the most important game of all time, it does both very well

 

[Woopah]

It's not hard, it's my hobby and obsession, i know what's going on in the game world, it's not like i don't know what happens outside my own space.

Back in the mid 90's there was less information but you could figure out what happens by going to school every day, hanging around with other gamers, hanging around in arcades, going to video game rental clubs and video game stores, reading every game magazine that gets printed including imported ones from other countries, watching TV shows about games and just being invested in the hobby in general. I even befriended a few game rental club owners, we would trade games all the time and they would let me hang around and play games in their stores for hours, even help them around with work so i can rent a game or two for free. You want to ask me how many of their customers were women gamers?

Is all that "anecdotal"? So what.

It's absolutely anecdotal. You're taking the experience of a gaming enthusiast and applying it to all PS1 owners. There's no guarantee that the people playing Frogger, Spyro or the Rugrats were watching gaming shows, hanging round in arcades or going to game stores.

There's no need for data when something is so big and well known/obvious. Certainly not the kind of data that cooks their own results and narrative. Like how they could count all mobile phones as gaming devices so everyone who has a phone is now a gamer. Or count someone who plays solitaire to kill time in the office.

People playing only on mobile phones or PC would not be included in Sony's PS4/PS5 registration data, nor in Circana's console data.

I never understood this There's no need for data when something is so big and well known/obvious. Certainly not the kind of data that cooks their own results and narrative. Like how they could count all mobile phones as gaming devices so everyone who has a phone is now a gamer. Or count someone who plays solitaire to kill time in the office.obsession of forcing the idea that women are into video games just as much as men. What happened? Is it because video games are now cool or something? You know it's fine if women don't care as much, it's not like playing video games is proof of virtue or something. It's just a stupid hobby.

Its not about forcing anything, its about looking at the data. Gaming came from the male dominated tech industry and that's why it was so male dominated early on. But as it has grown over the decades and become more mainstream, that focus on only one gender has faded somewhat.

Women's interest in gaming is not static, it's different at different times, in different countries and between different consoles.

So for example, Wii and DS had around a 50/50 gender split in the US, but that doesn't mean the PS3 had the same gender split.

To give another example, the large majority of early adopters of Nintendo Switch were male. But then factors like the Lite and Animal Crossing increased the female % over the years.

 

[nkarafo]

Women's interest in gaming is not static, it's different at different times, in different countries and between different consoles.

I'm not denying that. I'm denying the specific numbers i'm reading. 18% of PS1 owners in the mid 90's being women makes no sense and it's unrealistic. Simple as that. This data is cooked 100%.

Anecdotal but also true.

People playing only on mobile phones or PC would not be included in Sony's PS4/PS5 registration data, nor in Circana's console data.

My point is the data you are reading might not be as honest as you think.

If the numbers were more sane i wouldn't have any reason to doubt the data. If it was, say, 5% i would still be extremely impressed because even that seems too high but i would believe it because it's in the realm of reality. 18% is so unrealistic, the only logical conclusion is it's either fake or cooked or they are reaching by counting unrelated data. Maybe they included all the moms who bought consoles for their kids. They bought it so they have a PS1 now. That's a way to reach 18% i suppose.

There's no guarantee that the people playing Frogger, Spyro or the Rugrats were watching gaming shows, hanging round in arcades or going to game stores.

I don't understand the argument. You imply only boys are visible in the hobby for some reason? Why though? That seems like reaching to justify those data numbers.

 

[cireza]

Absolutely brutal trail derailment. Might as well change the title.

 

[Woopah]

I'm not denying that. I'm denying the specific numbers i'm reading. 18% of PS1 owners in the mid 90's being women makes no sense and it's unrealistic. Simple as that. This data is cooked 100%.

Anecdotal but also true.

My point is the data you are reading might not be as honest as you think.

If the numbers were more sane i wouldn't have any reason to doubt the data. If it was, say, 5% i would still be extremely impressed because even that seems too high but i would believe it because it's in the realm of reality. 18% is so unrealistic, the only logical conclusion is it's either fake or cooked or they are reaching by counting unrelated data. Maybe they included all the moms who bought consoles for their kids. They bought it so they have a PS1 now. That's a way to reach 18% i suppose.

If a company is presenting to investors, then at the very least they can't just make up numbers out of nothing. They have to be based on something and give a source.

The evidence is anecdotal and true for you, doesn't mean its true for the 100 million PS1 owners. You say that 5% is too high. How would you know? Even if your country had 0 female PS1 owners, there could still be 5 million female PS1 owners across the rest of the world.

I don't understand the argument. You imply only boys are visible in the hobby for some reason? Why though? That seems like reaching to justify those data numbers.

I'm saying that enthusiast gamers are more visible than casual ones. If you read games magazines and hang out in arcades and video-game-specific stores, you're going to get lots of visibility of core gamers but very little visibility of causal gamers. If it helps you to have some anecdotal evidence, then the girls I knew who played Rugrats and Monsters Inc are not people you are going to see doing any of the activities you described.

We shouldn't assume that casual gamers have the same gender % as core ones (the gender split difference between Wii and the Wii U shows us that).

Absolutely brutal trail derailment. Might as well change the title.

My apologies!

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

And its the same for gaming too no? Not all games have violence, and even those that do often also have multiple ing story, puzzles, exploraiton etc.



Circana and Sony's data has it at 41%, but there's always a margin of error so it could by more like 38-39% or semthing like that. That would make sense.
So I just went on the homepage of PlayStation Store to do an "eye test" and these would be my results:

Games where I don't see the female % being as high as GoT

Borderlands 3
NHL 24
Street Fighter 6
Gollum
Star Trek Resurgence
FIFA 23
40K Boltgun
Isle of Man 3
Resident Evil 4
Earth Defense Force 6
Conscript
F1 Manager 24

Games where I think the female % could be as high as GoT

Roblox
Minecraft
Balatro
Dredge
Hogwarts Legacy
The Last of Us
Theatrythm Final Fantasy
Tchia
Octopath Traveller II
A Space for the Unbound
Demon Slayer
Darkest Dungeon
Kunitsu-Gami

Notice: There's a pattern above. Big budget games than need to sell 10+ million copies go harder for the male audience. Lower budget games that need to sell 200k tend to be more gender neutral. Why aren't we seeing more Barbie (movie) type games? Shouldn't around 40% of games be hyper focused on a female audience like Halo and CoD is for guys?

Doesn't that kind of tell you that the polls are likely bogus?

Here's a list of the 20 best selling games of May...

Top 20 Best-Selling Games For May 2024 In The US

From punishing Souls-likes to kid-friendly Nintendo titles, May's list of top-selling games is quite diverse.

www.gamespot.com

That doesn't really strike me as 48% female, 41% female, or 38% female to me. Does it to you?

So the eye test tells me there are games women would enjoy.

Again, this is not the issue. Obviously there are female gamers. My issue is that the 41% or 48% numbers put out by PlayStation are bogus. My experience tells me the number is closer to 5% - 15%.

What I would say is that, when it comes to the increasing female % of console gaming, a lot of companies have responded by adding more female characters or more women in their markeitng, rather than changing the type of games they actually make.

This we can agree on. I think the market views females as potential customers. I don't know if you've been to an NBA or NHL game recently but the experience has drastically changed since when I was a kid. The in arena experience is very clearly attempting to cater to a female audience today. That wasn't the case back in the 1990s and earlier.

Nintendo have been actively making a vartiety of games for both genders, and that's why they have a higher gender % and acheve notbaly higher software sales than most other publishers. The eshop does look more like Netflix/Prime.

I would assume videogame interest dwindles significantly in the female population post puberty. Nintendo being more gender neutral, though still clearly catering to boys more, makes sense.

I would say they went into a pretty good level of detail when explaining their methodology. What makes you say its "very vague?"

I haven't seen all the details, only the brief few sentences you've shared with me.

 

[Woopah]

Notice: There's a pattern above. Big budget games than need to sell 10+ million copies go harder for the male audience. Lower budget games that need to sell 200k tend to be more gender neutral. Why aren't we seeing more Barbie (movie) type games? Shouldn't around 40% of games be hyper focused on a female audience like Halo and CoD is for guys?

Doesn't that kind of tell you that the polls are likely bogus?

I'm not seeing that pattern. On the lower list we have Minecraft, Roblox, Hogwarts and TLoU which likely have more players than any of the top list except FIFA.

On the lack of a Barbie movie type game, I think that a lot of big publishers simply don't know how. Things like Halo and COD and many other franchises were spawned decades ago when gaming was largely male. Nintendo had around a 50/50 split back in the Wii/DS days and they've used that knowhow to continue making a lot of popular, gender neutral games on Switch. Which is one of the factors why there games sell so well.

Its not just Nintendo though. I can see Just Dance having a high female split and Nomura has said the same for Kingdom Hearts..

Here's a list of the 20 best selling games of May...

Top 20 Best-Selling Games For May 2024 In The US

From punishing Souls-likes to kid-friendly Nintendo titles, May's list of top-selling games is quite diverse.

www.gamespot.com

That doesn't really strike me as 48% female, 41% female, or 38% female to me. Does it to you?

May 2024 itself does not look that way. But if we were to look at 2023 as a whole, there's plenty of game that could have a female split of a third or more including Hogwarts, Spiderman 2, Minecraft, TOTK, FFXVI, Mario Kart 8 and Mario Wonder. Baldur's Gate isn't on the chart as they don't share digital data, but I'd also include that on the list since 40% of DnD players are female.

Again, this is not the issue. Obviously there are female gamers. My issue is that the 41% or 48% numbers put out by PlayStation are bogus. My experience tells me the number is closer to 5% - 15%.

The discussed number for PlayStation has always been 41%, no one has claimed it's 48%. There's always a margin of error of course, but I can see it being a bit lower than that at around the mid to high 30s

This we can agree on. I think the market views females as potential customers. I don't know if you've been to an NBA or NHL game recently but the experience has drastically changed since when I was a kid. The in arena experience is very clearly attempting to cater to a female audience today. That wasn't the case back in the 1990s and earlier.

I looked up some stats and the New York Post says 47.5% of people watching the SuperBowl were female, so if that's true it shows its working

I would assume videogame interest dwindles significantly in the female population post puberty. Nintendo being more gender neutral, though still clearly catering to boys more, makes sense.

That's interesting, why do you believe that?

I haven't seen all the details, only the brief few sentences you've shared with me.

What was it about those sentences that were vague to you?

 

[bobbybabylon]

Video game graphics != video game

Most mechanics and rules have gone backwards, compared to say... Half-Life 2 . Nearly all game "stories" are barely at the level of mid-day soap operas or '50s pulp sci-fi. There is a reason video game cutsecene compilations aren't shown on Netflix.

Something went terribly wrong around 2005. Sure, we had FF7 on PSone trying to do the Hollywood blockbuster thing. But that was just one game genre in that generation. A genre that included Panzer Dragoon Saga and Vagrant Story for that generation. Ehen it went wrong was when nerds/geeks demanded that normies validate their supremely-crafted drek.

Which explains much of modern media, sadly

 

[bobbybabylon]

I think of the "holodeck" from "star trek: tng" as a future form of video games. yes its purely fictional and not intended to be a realistic view of the future, but for lack of anything better, well it's good to have dreams anywy xD

And why would that be more fun than Tetris DS?