Support NeoGAF

[Lernaean]

It could be that the omission is an error... the demographic range goes all the way down to 9yo and I would think that age range are more likely playing on handhelds.

Even if it's not, I'm not sure why people are taking offense. It's basically a definition comprising the bulk of the people who disproportionately drive software sales and towards whom the majority of software is targeted.

Again, taking no offence, but their definition of hardcore is wrong and they, unlike me, get paid to give said definition.

 

[Turrican3]

The NPD Group Reports 34 Million Core Gamers Spend an Average of 22 Hours per Week Playing Video Games

Port Washington, NY, May 13, 2014 – There are 34 million core gamers in the U.S. spending an average of 22 hours per week playing video games, according to Core Gaming 2014, the latest report from global information company, The NPD Group.

These 34 million core gamers, defined for this report as those individuals who play video games five or more hours a week on a PlayStation 3, PlayStation 4, Xbox 360, Xbox One, PC, or Mac, and who play Action, Adventure, Fighting, Flight, Massively Multi-Player, Racing, Real Time Strategy, Role-Playing, Shooter, or Sport genres on any of those devices.

“Core gamers are really the lifeblood of the industry, spending tremendous amounts of time on their hobby of choice,” said Liam Callahan, Industry Analyst. “With the new console generation off to a great start, we can expect the amount of time spent gaming to increase as more core gamers adopt them.”

While core gamers are most likely to play on consoles and computers simply based on the definition of the core gamer, phones and mobile devices are also a popular method of play by two-thirds of these gamers. Multiplayer gaming also plays a significant role within the core ecosystem, with close to 70 percent of core gamers playing multiplayer games either regularly or occasionally.

When given a choice in game format, 74 percent claim they would opt for the physical format over digital if the price was the same. However, the preference for digital is still on the move, up 5 percentage points from 21 percent to 26 percent this year.

“Core gamers are an important part of the games industry and understanding their behavior is critical to anyone invested in the games space – especially considering the launch of the new consoles and the continued evolution of digital gaming,” said Callahan.

Methodology
The survey completed by 7,927 US representative individuals age 9+ between march 10-28, 2014. For children age 9-17, respondents were contacted using a parental surrogate, with the parent being asked to bring the child to the computer to answer the survey questions.

https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/...age-of-22-hours-per-week-playing-video-games/

Press release straight from the NPD website.

So basically they completely ignored the handheld market. :-\

 

[Jintor]

I actually don't even think Nintendo's exclusion is that crazy. Nintendo has no core appeal. They have the two farthest ends of the spectrum, casuals and enthusiasts, but no core appeal at all aside from like, Zelda. All they make is either too casual for core gamers (Kirby, Mario) or too hardcore (Wonderful 101, Pikmin). Using them as a metric to measure core gamers would be almost useless.

What? I always thought enthusiast WAS core. Have I been wrong on this the whole time?

 

[shinra-bansho]

The definition is wrong for whom?

If I'm an investor in EA or Take-Two, or a buyer at GameStop, and so on...

What is wrong with the info being supplied about the defined core market?

*more info is obviously better for any decision making, but there's nothing wrong with this sort of segmentation.

 

[Erin S Kittens]

I think it's a mistake to ignore people who are fans of more niche stuff too (nevermind how Nintendo innately has universal appeal) but then they're probably only a million or so extra at best, and there's probably so much overlap with those that fall under the other categories (especially since a lot of them ARE on PC/PS3/Vita if that's counted) that the slice of hardcore that are on only Nintendo is very slim.

It's definitely fascinating data that deserves analysis. I know I'm not the only old-school gamer who sticks with Nintendo and dabbles in the rest, at present. I'd love to see how the games in my collection performed in this demographic--did I Am An Air Traffic Controller on 3DS break a thousand in the US? 2,500? Is there hope for more Ace Combat after the AC2 remake?

Still, it does leave me to think that a minimum they should qualify this as anyone who plays 5 or more hours (a week? a month?) on either dedicated hardware or PC/Mac via Steam/Origin/GOG/Uplay (lol) at a minimum. Probably should be 5 hours period really, but I guess there is the angle of someone wasting a LOT of time on Angry Birds or Candy Crush without actually either considering themselves core or what most people would recognize as core. If you play that much even on Nintendo systems you're probably close enough as you either set aside that time at home or cared to buy a gaming dedicated device.

I average about 15 hours a week on my 3DS and 5 hours elsewhere. Of the genres the report covers, I play action, adventure, fighting, flight, RPGs, shooters, and sports games. I wonder if publishers like Atlus get a report for this segment of the market, because they sure do love our platforms.

What? I always thought enthusiast WAS core. Have I been wrong on this the whole time?

If I'm not mistaken, 'core' is the middle-of-the-road gamer that the high-budget games are marketed to. We used to call them casuals and dudebros, I think, until they became the most profitable segment of the market.

 

[Lernaean]

The definition is wrong for whom?

If I'm an investor in EA or Take-Two, or a buyer at GameStop, and so on...

What is wrong with the info being supplied about the defined core market?

You are right, but as i said before, popular is not always hardcore.

I refuse to believe that analysts in this business (that is actually our hobby, don't forget that) believe that people with libraries of hundreds of games, shelves stacked full of arcade mobos and decades old presence in the arcade scene are considered casuals while people who buy one console just for a couple if popular games, most if them with zero fameplay, are considered hardcore.

You can call the former niche or relics that play irrelevant genres and i will undersrand, but not casuals.

 

[shinra-bansho]

You're getting too caught up in the label/semantics. They could have called it the "googlymoogly" market, defined it the same way and the information supplied and usefulness of that info doesn't change.

 

[Longsword]

https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/...age-of-22-hours-per-week-playing-video-games/

Press release straight from the NPD website.

So basically they completely ignored the handheld market. :-\

They did not. It just was not included in the core gamer definition, but the data on portable gamers is:

11% of the core gamers play on dedicated portable devices on average 10h a week. Average core gamer spends 4 hours on portable games per week.
25% of core gamers play on phones/other mobile devices on average 10h a week. Average core gamer spends 6.6 hours on mobile games per week.

 

[Lernaean]

Maybe, but the exclusion of not only Nintendo but of certain genres too makes it obvious that they have no idea about the definition of core gamer and they just read sales numbers, and even then it shows pure ignorance excluding the 3DS.

 

[erawsd]

If I'm not mistaken, 'core' is the middle-of-the-road gamer that the high-budget games are marketed to. We used to call them casuals and dudebros, I think, until they became the most profitable segment of the market.

The NPD defines "core gamer" as anyone that plays more than 5 hours a week, which I'm sure includes "enthusiasts". My guess is that the NPD would then define a "casual" gamer as someone that plays less than 5 hours a week.

 

[Erin S Kittens]

The NPD defines "core gamer" as anyone that plays more than 5 hours a week, which I'm sure includes "enthusiasts". My guess is that the NPD would then define a "casual" gamer as someone that plays less than 5 hours a week.

I play far more than 5 hours a week, but not on their recommended hardware

 

[Nerokis]

What? I always thought enthusiast WAS core. Have I been wrong on this the whole time?

A semantical discussion on this subject is not going to be productive. It's pretty silly, anyway, to arbitrarily decide franchises ranging from Mario to Pikmin are excluded from an undefined "core" category. "Is it on a Nintendo console?" is probably the only somewhat consistent yardstick underlying that categorization.

Anyway, NPD's definition of "core gamer" has a logic to it, but it's also one of the less interesting ones. There's undoubtedly a sizable audience of passionate gamers spread across the Wii U, 3DS, and Vita, and they meaningfully contribute to the health of the industry. They put in a lot of time into playing video games, as well, and are very likely to be people who will purchase other platforms in the future. In the end, though, I imagine that's reflected in the rest of the report (I'll have to read it in a bit), NPD is using the term "core gamer" in a very specific context, and debating the merits of their definition is relatively meaningless.

 

[SaintMadeOfPlaster]

It seems like a core gamer to them is just those that like to play popular genres on popular consoles.
It's like they said "Well, these are the types of games that make the top of our monthly list, let's call them the hard-core crowd and everyone else the "non-hardcore."

Wouldn't the people who are more likely to spend time in niche markets be considered more hardcore? They're the ones actively seeking to find games that aren't shoved in their face all over the place.

At the end of the day, though, the idea of a "hardcore gamer" versus any other type of gamer is ridiculous, toxic to the industry, and needs to be abandoned.

 

[erawsd]

I play far more than 5 hours a week, but not on their recommended hardware

Then you don't fit their definition of a core gamer?

However, my guess is that with such a high estimation of 34m they are including you even if they aren't reporting on Nintendo. Its likely just a case where they didn't survey Nintendo owners because their partners don't care about Nintendo's audience.

 

[Erin S Kittens]

Then you don't fit their definition of a core gamer?

However, my guess is that with such a high estimation of 34m they are including you even if they aren't reporting on Nintendo. Its likely just a case where they didn't survey Nintendo owners because their partners don't care about Nintendo's audience.

To be clear, I don't equate their 'core gamer demographic' with hardcore/enthusiast gamers, though there's naturally going to be overlap, just as their core demographic has strong overlap with casual gamers. I thought there was discussion a few years ago when NPD started using that term about how it specifically related to the AAA market, and how core and hardcore were not synonymous in this classification. I don't really mind not fitting their definition, because I'm not that market segment, but I find it humorous that lots of people are getting their backs up for various reasons about the way their core demographic is qualified.

 

[Eusis]

Phone/mobile device gamers and dedicated portable game device gamers are in two separate categories, i.e. not lumped together.

On the average, Mobile gamers spend more time playing than portable gamers, btw, and bigger portion of them are dedicated gamers playing more than 10 hours a week.

Fascinating stuff.

Wonder whether that means I underestimate the number of core gamers primarily on mobile, or if I'm doubly right about them wasting a lot of time messing around with games to kill the time more than anything else.

Well, good to know, and I imagine this would make the full survey rather interesting to see.

 

[erawsd]

To be clear, I don't equate their 'core gamer demographic' with hardcore/enthusiast gamers, though there's naturally going to be overlap, just as their core demographic has strong overlap with casual gamers. I thought there was discussion a few years ago when NPD started using that term about how it specifically related to the AAA market, and how core and hardcore were not synonymous in this classification. I don't really mind not fitting their definition, because I'm not that market segment, but I find it humorous that lots of people are getting their backs up for various reasons about the way their core demographic is qualified.

Of course, the NPD's definition of a "core gamer" doesn't align perfectly with the way GAF uses it since they're used for different purposes. My point is simply that their definition of a "core gamer" is not what we would call a "casual gamer" since its a very wide reaching use of the term.

I agree its silly that folks are so upset about how they are defined by the NPD for their partners.

 

[Longsword]

Wonder whether that means I underestimate the number of core gamers primarily on mobile, or if I'm doubly right about them wasting a lot of time messing around with games to kill the time more than anything else.

Well, good to know, and I imagine this would make the full survey rather interesting to see.

I think one would need to compare the spending on mobile games by core gamers to find that out. I think that if you spend 10+ hours a week on, say, Clash of Clans and 20$ a week as well, that is more than just messing around -it is then one of the main games you play and invest money in,

For a long time I have been curious to find out if it is indeed core gamers that drive most of the revenue on the mobile as well as on console (I suspect so myself). Hope we see a study on that sometime!

 

[mclem]

Five hours per what?

 

[Hyperactivity]

Five hours per what?

Week

 

[KingSnake]

So if you play a flight simulator you're cool.

 

[Morokh]

Basically the core gamer is the gamer that plays the games where the big money is at

(in the 'regular' gaming industry)

Not biased at all.

 

[ScepticMatt]

So MOBA players aren't "core gamers" by their definition

 

[Trent Strong]

So people who play moe visual novels on the PSP 1000 aren't core gamers? How dare they!

 

[Longsword]

So MOBA players aren't "core gamers" by their definition

It does list MMO games as part of the core games in the report itself. I would hazard a guess that MOBAs do count.

But yes, this is heavily skewered towards the traditional, money-generating games. I would imagine this is the data that is most useful for the major customers of NPD. The target audience of this report are the big publishers, Walmart, Gamestop et all, I bet.

 

[Canis lupus]

There are 3 categories to me:

• Core gamer
• Casual gamer: plays Fifa, CoD, GTA and the likes and nothing much else
• Non-gamer: the crowd Nintendo attracted with the Wii, moms, family etc, people who play fitness, party, educational type of games

 

[Daemul]

A week have 168 hours.

30 hours per week is only 17%.

I agree with NPD... a core gamer needs to play at least 4-5 hours per day... 5 hours per week is casual... less than 1 hour per day.

The average American spends 30 something hours per week watching TV. 22 hours actually strikes me as a rather low average amount of time for an enthusiast hobbyist to spend on their hobby, and 5 hours strikes me as not an enthusiast at all.

Yeah, 22 hours is actually much lower than I expected it to be, that's around 3 hours per day. The average time spent watching TV is higher than that.

 

[Basileus777]

A week have 168 hours.

30 hours per week is only 17%.

I agree with NPD... a core gamer needs to play at least 4-5 hours per day... 5 hours per week is casual... less than 1 hour per day.

17% not factoring in sleep, work/school, and other necessities. 30 hours per week is a lot of time when the normal work week is 40 hours.

 

[mclem]

Basically the core gamer is the gamer that plays the games where the big money is at

I think it's more "The core gamer is the gamer that third parties want to target". Although that's almost synonymous with what you say, there's a reasonable distinction.

However, it does perhaps muddy over the question over whether a gamer with those traits is the one they *should* be targetting.

 

[flatearthpandas]

You're getting too caught up in the label/semantics. They could have called it the "googlymoogly" market, defined it the same way and the information supplied and usefulness of that info doesn't change.

Of course. But since they could call it anything, why coopt the term that most serious gamers, even ones on Nintendo platforms, identify with? If they made a separate category for Nintendo consoles, platformers, arcade, and shmup and called it the casual market or the faggot market we could all brush it off as another arbitrary label for yet another NPD category whose significance isn't shared, but the category name itself in all examples is making a statement about the market it is supposedly defining and reflects on the people included or excluded for whatever reason.

People are not angry, but on GAF of all places we should understand that people can really identify with these labels. There was no explanation as to why some people were excluded from a category that they personally identify with. There's just a bunch of people who don't feel excluded and are okay with the fact that others do feel that way, telling people not to worry about it and inventing reasons not provided on why the exclusion is okay. There are a million examples for the taking about why it wouldn't be cool to take a label people associate with and arbitrarily exclude them from it. The answer isn't to tell the excluded people not to worry about labels, it is to use a different label that isn't going to exclude people who identify with it.

Of course, if NPD coined the term core game then that is a different story.

 

[TheRealTalker]

kinda offtopic but why was there no NPD prediction thread this month

 

[shinra-bansho]

Core means central, primary, key. It's perfectly satisfactory for the purpose of defining the people who comprise the majority of hardware and software revenue. And to whom the publishers target most, if not all for example in the case of something like Take-Two or Bethesda, of their publishing output towards.

The word you used is an offensive derogatory slur, which would imply some level of anger that I suggest you remove.

 

[flatearthpandas]

Core means central, primary, key. It's perfectly satisfactory for the purpose of defining the people who comprise the majority of hardware and software revenue. And to whom the publishers target most, if not all for example in the case of something like Take-Two or Bethesda, of their publishing output towards.

The word you used is an offensive derogatory slur, which would imply some level of anger that I suggest you remove.

Now who's getting too caught up in the label/semantics? The word I used effectively illustrates the point that, in fact, it does matter what you call things.

"Core gamer" means nothing. Moreover, NPD did not define "core gamer" as "the people who comprise the majority of hardware and software revenue." They defined it as people who play certain genres on non-Nintendo consoles. It's painfully obvious that the category is actually just "gamers that AAA third parties give a shit about" but that doesn't justify co-opting a term that other people previously identified with.

They took a term that many people identify with and redefined it so as to exclude some of those people. The same as if NATO decided tomorrow that Koreans aren't Asian or if the US Census decided that only people who live in New York, Florida, and South Dakota can really be black.

 

[shinra-bansho]

It's painfully obvious that the category is actually just "gamers that AAA third parties give a shit about"

Well-fricken-duh. Who do you think buys NPD reports for exorbitant sums? Why do you think NPD even produces reports? It's not to get you to have feels, good or bad.

I can't believe you're comparing using words like that, i.e. hate speech, to defining a market segment for the purposes of an industry report with an innocuous terminology.
That you think the two are remotely similar is so preposterously ignorant, I don't even know what to say.

 

[ethomaz]

17% not factoring in sleep, work/school, and other necessities. 30 hours per week is a lot of time when the normal work week is 40 hours.

30 hours per week is only 4 hours per day (well 28 but you get what I'm talking)... it is really low for a core gamer.

 

[The Llama]

Honestly, I think its easy to understand why they'd exclude Nintendo. For better or worse, Nintendo are sort of off doing their own thing right now. PC/Xbox/Playstation all have a lot in common. Nintendo just doesn't "fit in" with them. And I don't think thats trolling or being disrespectful, its just the way it is.

 

[flatearthpandas]

Well-fricken-duh. Who do you think buys NPD reports for exorbitant sums? Why do you think NPD even produces reports?

I can't believe you're comparing using words like that, i.e. hate speech, to defining a market segment for the purposes of an industry report.

I'm not. It is a simple point. It. Matters. What. You. Call. Something.

You said that the name of the category is essentially arbitrary. This is true, because there is no word with that categorization as an inherent definition. That doesn't mean that it's okay to name it anything and no one should have feelings about it.

"Core gamer" doesn't mean "gamer that AAA third parties care about." It is a term that people identify with that has nothing to do with that context. It should be perfectly understandable why anyone who identifies with the term might disagree with being arbitrarily excluded from it.

 

[shinra-bansho]

no one should have feelings about it.

"core gamer" doesn't mean anything. You can ask half a dozen people and they can give you half a dozen answers. NPD have used it to define a market segment, as is most appropriate for their research and reporting. You can continue to use it however you want. You can get a big tattoo on your forehead that reads "I'm a core gamer." That some people have some sort of irrational fixation with it, outside of simply using it to describe market segments, or attach some sort of strange self-worth to being a "core gamer" elicits no sympathy. It is trivial.

And is completely and utterly different from the use of terms by bigots to dehumanize people. That you think such an "example" suitably illustrates any point, beyond that there are much greater issues in the world, boggles the mind.

According to the definition, as I haven't had time recently to play as much as would be required, I am not a "core gamer." Who gives a tiny rats ass?

 

[jroc74]

Everyone surprised or shocked at Nintendo's exclusion...


Relevancy

Although.....I dont agree with them leaving out handhelds. Nintendo has that on lock right now. Especially when handheld gaming could be done alot more than home console gaming. Majority of us probably spend more time out the house than in.

The reason I am a "core gamer" today is Nintendo. I grew up playing their games. Their games taught me to be good at playing. Nintendo's exclusion from this list is fucking absurd and ridiculous.

The reason I'm a core gamer is because of Atari, ColecoVision, Nintendo, Sega, Sony. And from the Atari days to now different systems taught me there were pros n cons to all. Sega for me was for sport games overall. Platformers, split for me. RPG...split for me. Phantasy Star vs Final Fantasy.....I didnt pick a fav then and I wont now. But my first RPG was on a Sega system....so Phantasy Star holds a special place..

I wish that many of us could be able to enjoy more than 1 system at a time. And I just realized what taught me to be good at playing....Arcades. You...do ....not....want to suck playing an Arcade game with ppl watching you. It was almost as bad as a girl turning you down, saying she doesnt like you.

 

[inpHilltr8r]

kinda offtopic but why was there no NPD prediction thread this month

There was. www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=812443

 

[Aquamarine]

kinda offtopic but why was there no NPD prediction thread this month

I highly suggest you subscribe to this thread:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=413648

So you'll know when every NPD prediction thread comes out. There is never "no prediction thread."

 

[flatearthpandas]

"core gamer" doesn't mean anything. You can ask half a dozen people and they can give you half a dozen answers. NPD have used it to define a market segment, as is most appropriate for their research and reporting. You can continue to use it however you want. You can get a big tattoo on your forehead that reads "I'm a core gamer." That some people have some sort of irrational fixation with it, outside of simply using it to describe market segments, or attach some sort of strange self-worth to being a "core gamer" elicits no sympathy. It is trivial.

And is completely and utterly different from the use of terms by bigots to dehumanize people. That you think such an "example" suitably illustrates any point, beyond that there are much greater issues in the world, boggles the mind.

According to the definition, as I haven't had time recently to play as much as would be required, I am not a "core gamer." Who gives a tiny rats ass?

Before we get too personal with the implications, I do meet the "qualifications" and, as much as I do like Nintendo in spite of owning and playing some "core" hardware, am not personally offended. However, I do think the categorization itself was still intentionally "offensive" and I understand why anyone might be upset.

Anyway, to break down our discussion as it stands now:

1) You acknowledge that "core gamer" has no inherent meaning.
2) You acknowledge that many people may identify with the term "core gamer" in different ways
3) You acknowledge that because "core gamer" has no inherent meaning, it is no more appropriate as the name of that specific category than any other word, say "googlymoogly"
4) You forcefully acknowledge, however, that it is not okay to name the category with any word, i.e. that the name of the category is not meaningless even if it is arbitrary
5) You have no sympathy if people who do identify with the term "core gamer" feel marginalized on any level by being arbitrarily excluded.

Do you agree with this summary?

Whether you care about the people's feelings in point 5 or not, do you acknowledge that whatever negative feelings they may be experiencing could have been totally avoided by merely calling the category "googlymoogly" instead of a term that we all agree people identify with in various unique and personal ways?

In short, instead of telling people not to feel excluded when they are knowingly and purposefully excluded for arbitrary reasons, it is not unreasonable to say that NPD should not have knowingly and purposefully excluded people when they could have named their category any number of just as arbitrary, meaningless things from the large pool of inoffensive words that exist in the lexicon.

 

[Mysterious]

ITT, people don't know the definiton of a core market. People that play COD, FIFA, etc. are the core gamer.

 

[shinra-bansho]

However, I do think the categorization itself was still intentionally "offensive" and I understand why anyone might be upset.

That's a bizarre interpretation. NPD chose a market segment definition to intentionally offend? They chose it because it's a term that's regularly used, often to describe the market in the age range that buys the types of games described. It's a term often used to describe the demographics that third parties target their games towards. It's a term that investors, publishers, buyers, whomever reading the report will be able to discern meaning from - as again, at a basic level core means central/primary - rather than a word I made up in this thread.

4) You forcefully acknowledge, however, that it is not okay to name the category with any word, i.e. that the name of the category is not meaningless even if it is arbitrary

No, I object to the use of such terms in general, the why is already outlined above. It has nothing to do with naming of market segments.

5) You have no sympathy if people who do identify with the term "core gamer" feel marginalized on any level by being arbitrarily excluded.

Yes, because it's a term without a universally defined meaning. And they're still free to identify with the term as much as they want. They can shout it from the rooftops. People who feel "marginalized" over something so utterly trivial need to get some perspective on the world.

purposefully excluded for arbitrary reasons,

They aren't "arbitrary" reasons. The reasons have already been stated numerous times.

This is from Ubisoft (one of the publishers that does make a reasonable proportion of its sales from titles outside of the market segment described by NPD) who just released their financials.

5% of their sales in the last quarter came from Nintendo's platforms. 1% of their sales came from handhelds in general.
They brought in more sales revenue last quarter from Others, which I presume is smartphones/browser.
For both the quarter and the year as a whole ~80-90% of their revenue comes from PS, XBX home consoles and PC.

These are the people looking for insights from NPD reports. These are the people NPD design their studies for.

 

[10k]

This data loses validity with the omission of Nintendo platforms. It's probably roughly 10% of all consoles and handhelds put together.

So like close to 40 million probably.

 

[Opiate]

The definition is wrong for whom?

If I'm an investor in EA or Take-Two, or a buyer at GameStop, and so on...

What is wrong with the info being supplied about the defined core market?

*more info is obviously better for any decision making, but there's nothing wrong with this sort of segmentation.

Yes, this is the important thing to keep in mind here. I think we're all aware that Nintendo exists, that iOS is a rapidly growing market, that PC casual/browser/facebook games are a big deal.

But if I'm Take 2 or Ubisoft or Activision, all of those markets are basically invisible to me -- and those sorts of major publishers are NPD's primary consumer. They sell the vast majority of their products on Xboxes, Playstations, and "hardcore" PC platforms like Steam. It doesn't mean that the 3DS doesn't matter or the iPhone is for loser noobs or that the Facebook games are for dumb dumb poopoo heads, it just means that the businesses that buy data from NPD don't make games there, for the most part.

 

[The Llama]

This data loses validity with the omission of Nintendo platforms. It's probably roughly 10% of all consoles and handhelds put together.

So like close to 40 million probably.

Even with this definition, how many gamers are they missing out on? How many people ONLY game on the 3DS/WiiU? Probably not many. And of those, many of them aren't "core gamers" anyway.

 

[Opiate]

Even with this definition, how many gamers are they missing out on? How many people ONLY game on the 3DS/WiiU? Probably not many. And of those, many of them aren't "core gamers" anyway.

Just forget the number for Nintendo and realize who this report is actually targeted at. The exclusion of Nintendo is not an oversight, and it's not a slight.

The report is aimed at large third party publishers who do most of their business on Xbox/Playstation/PC. You know that trifecta of multiplat we saw last generation? Companies routinely producing games for 360/PS3/PC? Those people. That's who buys NPD's data.

 

[The Llama]

Just forget the number for Nintendo and realize who this report is actually targeted at. The exclusion of Nintendo is not an oversight, and it's not a slight.

The report is aimed at large third party publishers who do most of their business on Xbox/Playstation/PC. You know that trifecta of multiplat we saw last generation? Companies routinely producing games for 360/PS3/PC? Those people. That's who buys NPD's data.

Oh I agree, and I said as much earlier in the thread. I was just wondering how many gamers were left out by excluding Nintendo anyway.

Honestly, I think its easy to understand why they'd exclude Nintendo. For better or worse, Nintendo are sort of off doing their own thing right now. PC/Xbox/Playstation all have a lot in common. Nintendo just doesn't "fit in" with them. And I don't think thats trolling or being disrespectful, its just the way it is.

 

[Paracelsus]

This data loses validity with the omission of Nintendo platforms. It's probably roughly 10% of all consoles and handhelds put together.

So like close to 40 million probably.

Maybe it's because of this messed up mindset

How can you call yourself hardcore if you miss out on the grapheecks and all the Triple-Aitch third party games Nintendo doesn't have?

As stupid as it sounds, that seems to me like it's their actual line of thinking.