There's more Adult Female gamers than Teenage Boys

[IkeTheGeneric]

Either way you look at it, I refuse (and I don't understand how you accept it) to acknowledge casual mobile game players as actual gamers. It's dumb.

what

casual games are videogames

an actual gamer is somebody who plays videogames

there's no other definition because that would be loving nuts

[Ad Bot]

[Operator¹]

dirty casuals

[LeetZero]

dirty casuals

filthy casuals*

[Ben Grapevine]

I would say a true gamer is someone who has the ability to/ finds enjoyment in playing a wide variety of games (e.g. Skyrim  + candy crush + Mario Kart or whatever combinations make your fancy) and is not limited to a single platform, genre, or play style.

[DrenDran]

These studies assume flappy bird and starcraft, KSP and fruit ninja, blockland and angry birds are all equal. That really bothers be.
forget no I don't want to be compared to someone who plays that stuff.

These studies prove stuff and are nothing but feminist propaganda.
Compare PC games and it goes right back to being mostly males.

Mobile games count as games too. If you play them a lot you're a gamer. Just because the game might be free and have microtransactions that doesn't mean it isn't a valid game.
What's so special about being a gamer anyway that you want to preserve the title from people who play mobile/Facebook games?

The issue here besides the insult of being compared to them (I mean, if I developed a game I sure as hell would like some way to distinguish it from candy crush and flappy bird) is the fact that this demographic might someday have some influence on the rest of gaming.
I mean, if people interpret this the way feminists want them to and just quickly assume this applies to or will eventually apply to all forms of video games, then developers might start to make changes to accommodate this demographic.
Changes that will include among others:
1. More annoying social features most users completely ignore. I don't want TF2 to offer to share my kills with instagram.
2. Microtransactions. Many "gamers" have always hated this idea yet the women mentioned here are far more likely to happily eat this stuff up.
3. Less complexity. As games get more mainstream and social, they tend to lose complexity as to appeal to a larger demographic.

[McJobless]

These studies assume flappy bird and starcraft, KSP and fruit ninja, blockland and angry birds are all equal. That really bothers be.
forget no I don't want to be compared to someone who plays that stuff.

Why does it bother you? Does it make your willy small when you find out other people are playing games they like?

These studies prove stuff and are nothing but feminist propaganda.
Compare PC games and it goes right back to being mostly males.

I'm not a feminist, but forget me mate, it sounds like you're a bit threatened by women playing your games.

Stop acting like a 3yo who doesn't want to share, and realise that gaming is just as diverse as every other field of media. How do you think people who enjoy reading well crafted novels feel about joke books? Are they going to suddenly disown the people who enjoy reading those? Probably not, because they actually have an ounce of common sense.

[Zeblote]

Maybe the result is also related to there being more adult females than teenage boys? What kind of handicap test is this?

[DrenDran]

Why does it bother you? Does it make your willy small when you find out other people are playing games they like?
I'm not a feminist, but forget me mate, it sounds like you're a bit threatened by women playing your games.

Stop acting like a 3yo who doesn't want to share, and realise that gaming is just as diverse as every other field of media. How do you think people who enjoy reading well crafted novels feel about joke books? Are they going to suddenly disown the people who enjoy reading those? Probably not, because they actually have an ounce of common sense.

I added more:

I mean, if people interpret this the way feminists want them to and just quickly assume this applies to or will eventually apply to all forms of video games, then developers might start to make changes to accommodate this demographic.
Changes that will include among others:
1. More annoying social features most users completely ignore. I don't want TF2 to offer to share my kills with instagram.
2. Microtransactions. Many "gamers" have always hated this idea yet the women mentioned here are far more likely to happily eat this stuff up.
3. Less complexity. As games get more mainstream and social, they tend to lose complexity as to appeal to a larger demographic.

tl;dr two things:
1. It's an insult to be make a game and have it compared to ex. flappy bird in any way whatsoever.
2. Yes, I'm worried about too many mainstream women going into games. There's a chance this may lead to some developers using this as an excuse to release lower quality products or get away with adding features previously lamented by the entire community.

[McJobless]

is the fact that this demographic might someday have some influence on the rest of gaming.

Not on the entirety of gaming, no. There will always be game developers who want to make every type of game you can imagine. People keep discussing the "influence" that people will supposedly have on the industry, but when it comes down to it, most AAA devs/publishers will build games for the market that guarentees the most profit, and indies will do whatever the forget they want. Women aren't going to ruin anything.

Changes that will include among others:
1. More annoying social features most users completely ignore. I don't want TF2 to offer to share my kills with instagram.
2. Microtransactions. Many "gamers" have always hated this idea yet the women mentioned here are far more likely to happily eat this stuff up.
3. Less complexity. As games get more mainstream and social, they tend to lose complexity as to appeal to a larger demographic.

• And yet, look at how Playstation integrated Twitch with the "Share" button. It's not female influence, it's social network influence as whole. Look at gaming communities. Companies want to buy into that, because it's free marketing. That's why they introduce social features, not because women are more likely to share their stats on FB than men.
• This battle far extends the "influence of women", and they're not going to be pushing for or against it. At the end of the day, they probably don't even care so long as they can get to the game. I honestly can't see them having any dialogue in this.
• Of course, because games like The Wolf Among Us, Hearthstone (10 million players, F2P), XCOM: Enemy Unknown and so on so forth have all been "dumbed down" now that women are playing games. Absolutely happening.

I added more:tl;dr two things:
1. It's an insult to be make a game and have it compared to ex. flappy bird in any way whatsoever.
2. Yes, I'm worried about too many mainstream women going into games. There's a chance this may lead to some developers using this as an excuse to release lower quality products.

• No it's not. Regardless of its quality, comparisons should be made, so that we can see why games are so successful and then build better games using the lessons we learned.
• See above. They aren't going to affect YOUR games in any way, shape or form. We'll all get the games we want, and that's that.

[LeetZero]

-bullstuff-

1. Twitch is a gaming streaming website dedicated for games. In the same realm, it would be logically bad to say chat programs have social media interactions. No. That is not the point. It's when games have social media interaction that it's bad.
2. They don't have to have a dialogue, it's pretty obvious this is feminist propaganda in order to influence more developers that this is a "worth investing in" demographic.
3. In fact, there have been games which have been dumbed down or censored because "muh loveism" female intervention. I don't see the issue here, this point is pretty valid.


4. That's is a completely handicapped statement, when it's easier to make stuff than quality the "lessons" developers get is that it's better to be a lazy prick and get more money.
5. They do. That's DrenDran's point. What is Rollercoaster Tycoon and Dungeon Keeper?


The Disqus on the article has been set to moderator-approval. This is totally not censorship.

[Quote Story]

Why is it hard to comprehend that people have different tastes, experiences, and that not all games have to be 1080P MLG 1337 HD HARDCORE FPS NO SKRUBZ ALLOWED?

Most "gamers" want games to be taken as a serious thing like art and don't like it when "casual" games are also classified as "art" too.

[DrenDran]

Politics as well as demographics do influence what gets made, or at the very least, what gets popular. I don't understand how you can seriously say neither of these has any influence whatsoever. Indie games need an outlet for their popularity. If that outlet is Kotaku or any Gawker site for example, then there sure as hell better not be anything "misogynist" in them like maintaining eye contact with a woman too long. Lest it get bad reviews and not too many players.

The "social influence" might not be explicitly women, but it is a result of 'gaming' going 'mainstream'. If people really believe all these women are getting involved then it'll be seen as even more 'mainstream' and developers will take it as license to do more of the same stuff. Women disproportionally play games that involve microtransactions, by the way. This isn't irrelevant. Lastly, I'm not sure why you just cherry picked three games to prove that games can't get more simple to pander to people. Compare mobile games and console/pc games in complexity and see what you get there.

Lastly, what can we seriously get out of comparing flappy bird with blockland?

[LeetZero]

Most "gamers" want games to be taken as a serious thing like art and don't like it when "casual" games are also classified as "art" too.

If I calculate 1+1 that does not make me nor a mathematician or a financial advisor.
If a kid draws a stuffty picture of a cat that does not make him an artist.
If a person takes a picture of food with his 10 year old phone camera and puts it on Instagram that does not make him a photographer.
If my dog lays out a enormous stuff on someone's car, that does not make him a sculptor.
Why is it so okay now that playing physically any game, that makes you a gamer.

[McJobless]

1. Twitch is a gaming streaming website dedicated for games. In the same realm, it would be logically bad to say chat programs have social media interactions. No. That is not the point. It's when games have social media interaction that it's bad.
2. They don't have to have a dialogue, it's pretty obvious this is feminist propaganda in order to influence more developers that this is a "worth investing in" demographic.
3. In fact, there have been games which have been dumbed down or censored because "muh loveism" female intervention. I don't see the issue here, this point is pretty valid.
4. That's is a completely handicapped statement, when it's easier to make stuff than quality the "lessons" developers get is that it's better to be a lazy prick and get more money.
5. They do. That's DrenDran's point. What is Rollercoaster Tycoon and Dungeon Keeper?

• I don't see the problem. The social media functions don't hinder your progress through gameplay. Even if they're coded into the game's interface, they aren't going to suddenly leap out and prevent you from finishing your quest until you make a status about it. And again, I still believe it's not the female gamers that caused this, but social media's overall popularity and the gaming community as a whole.
• How the forget is this "feminist propaganda"? So, you're saying that feminists believe micro-transactions are the way of the future, and that all people who don't want them should die just like the patriarchy?
• Lots of things gets censored. Saint's Row IV and South Park were both censored here because the Government is afraid of drugs and brown town probes. The problem isn't females specifically, it's censorship in general
• Again, not a female problem. Look at the retro age of gaming. They were doing it then as well.
• Because women would absolutely love to play a game about Dungeons, so that was absolutely EA's target market.

Most "gamers" want games to be taken as a serious thing like art and don't like it when "casual" games are also classified as "art" too.

Video games have a long, winding path to become art yet. A Theory of Fun and similar books cover this subject well.

That said, look at paintings, and then look at comic books. They're essentially the same; drawings. Both are considered some type of art, despite the massive difference in quality. So, why are games getting special treatment?

Politics as well as demographics do influence what gets made, or at the very least, what gets popular. I don't understand how you can seriously say neither of these has any influence whatsoever. Indie games need an outlet for their popularity. If that outlet is Kotaku or any Gawker site for example, then there sure as hell better not be anything "misogynist" in them like maintaining eye contact with a woman too long. Lest it get bad reviews and not too many players.

Because Gawker/Polygon are the majority of where players go to get their opinions on what to buy.

There may be some level of influence, but it is not dramatic enough to make the shifts you're suggesting will happen, and with the amount of reviewers/review sites, gaming communities, and people in general who like to share their opinion, I find it hard to believe that the loudest of the bunch will be the women, when it's quite clear that places like Reddit, 4chan, NeoGaf, YouTube etc are male-centric, and they seem to drive a lot of what goes on.

The "social influence" might not be explicitly women, but it is a result of 'gaming' going 'mainstream'. If people really believe all these women are getting involved then it'll be seen as even more 'mainstream' and developers will take it as license to do more of the same stuff. Women disproportionally play games that involve microtransactions, by the way. This isn't irrelevant. Lastly, I'm not sure why you just cherry picked three games to prove that games can't get more simple to pander to people. Compare mobile games and console/pc games in complexity and see what you get there.

The problem of complexity between the two platforms has less to do with females and more to do with the platforms themselves. I've been running two surveys recently, one about mobile games and one about female vs. male gamers. The mobile survey suggests people want to treat their mobile games as a "on-the-go" experience. They don't care to sit down and play anything serious on it, they want to play something quick while on the way to work or school. That's at least what preliminary data is showing.

Lastly, what can we seriously get out of comparing flappy bird with blockland?

One seems to appeal to bigger audience, whereas the other fits a very certain niche. One also was designed using a known science to make it "more enjoyable", whereas the other was made as more of an environment for other people to make the content with. etc etc

[DrenDran]

To be fair you can replace "females" or "women" with "mobile gamers" if you want.
That's really the issue here. I don't give two forgets about gender, it's just that the study/topic made it relevant.

I'll continue reading your post in a bit.