Older Gamers More Willing to Pay-to-Play and Save Time

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
A new survey finds that older mobile social games players are willing to fork over cash to jump ahead to higher levels, saving time in the process. The older the player, the more money they were willing to spend on ‘free’ games.

But money spent to skip the grind skyrocketed in the older group. Nearly 50 percent of 25- to 34-year-olds reported they spend real money on freemium games, compared with only 16 percent in the younger group.
Click to expand...
 
I suppose when deaths-a-knocking, times is much much more precious :D

But anyway, wouldn't a 25-34 year old probably have more money than an 18 year old?
 
This is horseshit. If anything I feel the exact opposite, mind you I'm only 28, but I'm a "NO DLC" "NO PAY 2 WIN" policy guy.
 
So hold on, if you're paying to jump ahead, how are you actually 'playing' the game then?
 
I would've called this common sense. Ofcourse there are exception like lilbabycat above, but I know a lot of guys who struggle with the fact that we have all this money we can spend on our hobby, but not enough time to dedicate to it.

And to respond to lilbabycat's comment, I understand your no DLC policy, but I disagree with your idea of "pay 2 win" simply because I don't believe someone spending money on anything will instantly make them a better player. I remember playing MMO's where we found people who had bought their max level characters, and these folks just did not have the experience necessary with their class to function in difficult raids. Likewise I remember playing small F2P games like S4 League where better weapons could be bought, but the highly skilled players were destroying them using the most basic of weapons.
 
My sister buys crap for Farmville and she is 54. So yea I can agree with this article.
 
I know this article is probably referring to casual games, but here's my take (I'm 28).

I rather pay a subscription than play f2p model games. I don't like being milked, and those f2p games always end up costing you more for the same experience, because they are using the revenue from you to cover the hosting expense for you plus several freeloaders.

DLC, ugh, most of it is trash. If a game is loaded with DLC that I may want to play, I end up waiting for a GOTY copy. They would have got more money out of me with a full game + full expansion model, since I would buy those at release. The newer policy of Steam requiring DLC to be sold through them does help motivate me to purchase games sooner,since the DLC will receive the benefits of Steam sales). I really don't think the price of DLC matches the product.
 
Wouldn't it be more so because those older gamers also have more money compared to the younger ones? And not necessarily because of age alone?
 
I see it, i'm 29 and I'm all about buying shit to save time. 10 years ago I wouldn't. But I make more money and now time is a little more limited.
 
This doesn't surprise me at all. Older people have more money and less time. I don't think this required a study.
 
qbanb8582 said:
I see it, i'm 29 and I'm all about buying shit to save time. 10 years ago I wouldn't. But I make more money and now time is a little more limited.
Click to expand...

I agree, just a hair older than you and for me it's about avoiding some of the time sinks programmed into some games if I can. I simply cannot stand grinding game content to be able to access more of the game(s) I pay for.
 
I call BS I'm older 40's and I'd still rather play and earn my shit, whats the fun of playing if you can just buy everything.
 
Hmmm... Well I must be an "Old School" Gamer then. Because while I'm an "older" gamer, I don't agree with this type of stuff at all. I want to actually play the game and I expect a reasonable reward. That reward comes in the form of Experience and Items (or the game's monetary units). And I've always understood that Game companies like this severely nerf the rewards given for playing to Force Players to give them money (normally more money than they'd pay with a sub). What I don't understand is how so many players can agree to put themselves in this position.

Then again this article isn't really about the type of MMOs that I prefer to play. This is games like Farmville that I have no interest in playing. Yet I have seen allot of second rate titles, in the MMORPG camp, go free to play recently. I suppose if SWTOR and GW2 both bomb, and all the MMORPGs go F2P, I'll save allot of money. I just don't appreciate a system that's designed to bilk me out of "extra money", while it pretends to be "free".
 
No way I'd "pay to play" (or advance), as I got older and got less time for games, I just didn't play games as much. Much more simply solution.
 
Guys even you're gonna post at least click and read the link so H can make some damn money.
 
i'm not quite 30 yet, but i definitely have noticed that i'm quicker to spend money on things now as compared to 10 years ago - probably because i was flat broke most of the time until i got out of school.
 
It goes without saying that older people tend to make more money within an hour's time, than what they can produce in an hour of grinding. To them it's either a choice of spending 20 hours "free" in order to achieve something vs. spending a single hour of real life work in order to achieve the same thing.

Seems smart, but the smarter thing is to play a game that you enjoy and isn't based on the grind. That's why I tend to like single player games. And for those who like feeling godlike, you can cheat for free without listing to 9 year old chatter in a language somewhat resembling english.
 
Maybe a small minority of older people consider themselves gamers so the survey has some skewing. I am an 'older' gamer and refuse to do the pay to play shit. I just don't have time for it.

Give me some FPS for an hour with real people and I'm good for a while. Gives me time to tuck the kid in, watch some tv, go to restaurants, etc...real life stuff.
 
The people that do this shit are not gamers and should never be called such. You are not playing the game if your buying your way through it.

Oh wait. That's the American way! Throw money at it to progress and get your way!
 
This story is a little retarded for one reason.

Older gamers have this little thing called a jerb, and they work, and they collect money for their work.

They want to go home and relax, and they have money, so they spend on what makes them happy.

Never saw a damn thing wrong with that.

Majordomo is probably older than all of us, I wonder how much he spends on games a year :p
 
with kids and a demanding job i dont have the free time to play for advancement. sometimes a hour or two a week is all the free time i can muster and paying for advancement makes perfect sense to me.
 
You can buy your way thru the game, but then you'll get bored faster. Don't understand the mentality. I'm nearly 43 and I'd rather play thru the game normally and enjoy it instead of trying to fast forward to the end.

People could avoid playing grindy games if they don't have the time.
 
In certain games, I welcome it. For instance I play GTA IV just to kill some time. All I do is run over people and shoot people and watch the cops chase me. Now if there was a code to unlock all the cities and remove the road blocks, I would pay for it. Situations like this, I would pay to unlock it like that.
 
I don't mind paying for certain things, but to me the micro transaction model is just too much.
 
qbanb8582 said:
I see it, i'm 29 and I'm all about buying shit to save time. 10 years ago I wouldn't. But I make more money and now time is a little more limited.
Click to expand...


this. I'm not going to pay for any crappy facebook game but I'll buy gold in an MMO. Not enough time to grind. When $5-$10 will get you more gold than you can grind in 50+ hours count me in.
 
I don't spend much time on gaming anymore like I used too when I was younger, just like everyone else. Its a common thing as we get older.

But for me, that means I don't do much MMO anymore or games that requires lots of grinding. Most of the time I play single player games now, finish one and move on to another. I just find it kind of pointless to continue playing MMO by buying leveled up characters as it would meant I'm missing out on the part where I actually play and shape that character to my liking.


Concillian said:
If 25 - 34 is an "older gamer" I must be in the "gaming from his coffin" category.
Click to expand...
LOL
 
I clicked some ads. Hope you get a few cents.

A new survey finds that older mobile social games players are willing to fork over cash to jump ahead to higher levels, saving time in the process. The older the player, the more money they were willing to spend on ‘free’ games.
Click to expand...

True.

I don't like F2P, so you'll get nothing from me.

gaming from his coffin
Click to expand...

lqtm

funny-old-people-hate.jpg
 
In January 2011, according to the NPD Group, 2010 worldwide video game revenue, excluding hardware, exceeded $15 billion. Strikingly, console game sales were down by 5% in 2010 over 2009. PC sales were up slightly by 3%, primarily due the release of the latest StarCraft installment by studio veteran Blizzard Entertainment. As Flurry described in its analysis last year, hardcore gaming is facing competition from more mass-market-friendly gaming apps on mobile devices. In particular, iOS is taking a bite out of portable platforms.

Below are two charts that demonstrate how age and gender demographics vary between the traditional gaming audience and mobile social gamers.
Click to expand...

http://blog.flurry.com/bid/57219/Mobile-Social-Gamers-The-New-Mass-Market-Powerhouse

Also includes info on age, gender, household income, country, education, blah blah blah.
 
Parmenides said:
It goes without saying that older people tend to make more money within an hour's time, than what they can produce in an hour of grinding. To them it's either a choice of spending 20 hours "free" in order to achieve something vs. spending a single hour of real life work in order to achieve the same thing.

Seems smart, but the smarter thing is to play a game that you enjoy and isn't based on the grind. That's why I tend to like single player games. And for those who like feeling godlike, you can cheat for free without listing to 9 year old chatter in a language somewhat resembling english.
Click to expand...

game developers are just taking advantage of old people lol
 
Kelby said:
So wtf are mobile social games?
Click to expand...

Think (blame) zynga, they have a ton of games spun off for mobile. 11 of them doing a quick search.

The weird part to me is most of the mobile games you can't buy something and move it to your on-the-site game. So they're trying to grab peoples' money online and on their phones.

I believe (don't have anything concrete, but) that zynga and their "freemium" (like that word) method of enticing players with you can only get this special whatever if you buy it using real $$ to buy virtual $$. Other companies have seen their success with this and jumped on-board.

Of course zynga is getting very, very greedy and I think it's going to backfire on them, same with any other of these games that start charging the equivalent of $10++ for 1 item.

These companies depend on their "whales" and even the more casual spend $10 to $20 a month. The justification is "the company has to make money, nothing's free for them and it's free for us to play". Which of course is wrong. Every time you log into one of these games and see the ads, you're giving them ad revenue.

I feel like buying something because you want it (think the farmville/cityville type games) is one thing. Buying something that gives a huge or unfair edge is another. Now you're not really playing the game, the game is playing you and your competition. I've dropped a couple games because of the whole buy to win crap. I can't and won't try to compete against someone who can afford to spend big money.
 
I am 41, and I don't mind paying for DLC for games I really like. I played the heck out of Guild Wars - I own all 3 collectors editions and most of the packs they sell in the online store.

Part of it is being something of a completionist and a small part of it is something similar to leaving a good tip for exceptional service. There are very very few games that I feel that way about however.

I played Global Agenda for a while with some friends and I liked that you could pay for accelerated XP - you still have a lot of grind (I didn't get that far before I moved on) but it's nice to shorten the time required. I think I payed less than $10 for 3 months worth, but I can't remember.

I would do that again for some games - games where I want to play with friends and catch up to be able to play at a certain level, but for games I would play a lot - like Guild Wars, I am not sure I would do that as I would rather take it slow and savor the experience.

A lot of people seem pretty hung up on DLC - it does not bother me at all, rather I see it as a test of how much I like the game - enough to throw $10 or so at it for more experience? That's like the cost of a fast food meal and pretty trivial if I like the game.
 
According to the study, most older gamers don't waste time on "mobile social games." 50% more people, use 3% less of the gaming time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top