Video Games Now Account For More Than Half of UK Entertainment Market (independent.co.uk) 49
The video games sector now accounts for more than half of the entertainment market in UK, according to new figures. From a report: The Entertainment Retailers Association (ERA) said the gaming market's value rose to $4.85bn, more than double what it was worth in 2007. It now makes gaming a larger market than video and music combined for the first time. The figures show three games -- Fifa 19, Red Dead Redemption 2 and Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 -- each sold more than one million physical units in the UK across games consoles during 2018. ERA chief executive Kim Bayley said: "The games industry has been incredibly effective in taking advantage of the potential of digital technology to offer new and compelling forms of entertainment. Despite being the youngest of our three sectors, it is now by far the biggest."
Re:brits (Score:4, Interesting)
mindless zombies
Is someone who plays a game more of a "mindless zombie" than someone who watches TV?
I'm not saying either activity is probably very healthy if overdone- but surely, playing games where you think and interact is less "mindless zombie" than watching TV where you don't interact at all.
By this metric, reading is as bad as TV (Score:1)
I couldn't agree more. In fact, I find it easier to fall asleep at night while watching TV in bed. Without TV my mind is always ticking over thinking about things that keep me awake. Watching TV, I find it easy to mentally switch off and I easily nod off.
Many of us do the same thing reading, so I wouldn't "read" too much into that.
In fact, I'd be careful drawing any conclusions. An hour spent watching PBS is likely to be more intellectually rewarding than the same hour playing . In contrast, an hour spent
Re: (Score:3)
It might not be for mindless zombies, but it may be trying to turn you into one.
Re: (Score:3)
mindless zombies
Is someone who plays a game more of a "mindless zombie" than someone who watches TV?
I'm not saying either activity is probably very healthy if overdone- but surely, playing games where you think and interact is less "mindless zombie" than watching TV where you don't interact at all.
Depends.
Shooting zombies or catching cupcakes or whatever might be a little less intellectually stimulating than a Sherlock Holmes movie or a serialization of The Brothers Karamazov.
Re: (Score:2)
While I agree with your general point, my feeling is that gaming seems to take up more time. People are more engaged (more entertained, if you like) and less aware of how long they've sat playing a game than they are when watching TV, except for box-bingeing. I guess it's the interactive nature of the pass-time.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it's easier to get your subliminal orders from the secret world government by watching TV with a slack jaw.
Reasons (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You think?
FIFA 19 (35th game [wikipedia.org] in the series)
Red Dead Redemption 2 (2nd game in the series, but since it's basically "Grand Theft Auto on a horse" you could almost say it's the 17th GTA game)
Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 (15th game [wikipedia.org] in the series)
Re: (Score:3)
Difference is, there's plenty of small AA/A class studios(Paradox, CDProjekt, 4A, Larian) out there to pick from, who all have passed the bar the AAA studios once had. And unlike say TV or movies, there hasn't been a mass convergence of video game companies, especially since anyone with time and patience can sit down learn unity or unreal and start working on a game with provided assets. Hell there's a booming business in games just surrounding RPGMaker.
The funny thing that you mentioned with FIFA 19, R
Re: (Score:3)
The biggest difference is highlighted by this story. As the market expanded and more people played computer games, the actual computer gamer, the one everyone actually thinks of, become the minority market and the rube noobs became the majority market. This hugely altered the nature of games. From games that had to win over players, to games that simply had to con players, where advertising counted more than game code ie rake in as much money as fast as you can until the rubes wise up and stop buying, then
Re: (Score:2)
Red Dead Redemption 2 (2nd game in the series, but since it's basically "Grand Theft Auto on a horse" you could almost say it's the 17th GTA game)
Red Dead 2 is actually the third in the series. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
These days though I basically pour my time into elite and pubg and get way more entertainment than any film or tv show I know of.
The reality is... (Score:2, Interesting)
... of course it is, the reality is when you put microtransactions and gambling mechanics inside games.
One of the reasons it's grown so much is because the game playing masses on both PC and phones is fucking tech illiterate. Steam, mmo's, mobile gambling/gacha games could only exist in a world where the average gamer is bum fuck moron.
Watching RPG's gettting rebranded MMO's in the 90's to stick drm server lock into them and charge a subscription was annoying, the fact that the public fell all over themsel
Re: (Score:3)
Watching RPG's gettting rebranded MMO's in the 90's to stick drm server lock into them and charge a subscription was annoying,
Which is exactly why I avoided the MMOs and stuck with the games that weren't (and still do).
the fact that the public fell all over themselves to pay money for software they didn't own or control incentivized the entire industry to code games in a way that the public never controls the game. Watching Team fortress 2 going from paid product to f2p microtransaction ridden game was pretty much the death knell for game ownership. Now that even fucking starcraft 2 is in on it.
Sad place where PC gaming and software ownership (aka windows 10 as a service we definitely are in an idiocracy) ended up due to the masses getting internet.
And, I've resisted that too. I do use steam now because there is very little choice- so I guess I don't own my games- but I held out as long as I could until there really wasn't any games left that you didn't need steam for. I still won't buy any denuvo games because I don't want to have to be online to play (I don't have the option to be online all the time- my ISP is spectrum so I only have internet connection a
RPG vs MMO (Score:2)
Watching RPG's gettting rebranded MMO's in the 90's to stick drm server lock into them and charge a subscription was annoying,
On the paper, RPG and MMO try to cater to different taste.
- RPG are still single player (think Witcher 3)
- whereas MMO are the multiplayer online cousin thereof.
There is a difference, it's not simply rebranding.
But for the rest (using this as an excuse to lock the players into subscription-based cash-milking scheme) I fully agree.
Nothing technically should prevent you from running your own server and having your own run with your group of friends instead of needing to rent out some "shard" in some publisher
Re:The reality is... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not as bleak as you put it. First of all, RPGs still exist, despite MMOs. Mostly because, despite the name, they're two very different kinds of games. Yes, you play a character in both of them. But that's where the similarities end. In a single player RPG, your exploits matter. The world can be shaped by your deeds and misdeeds, something that is completely impossible in an MMO. If what you did mattered in the world there, the next player couldn't experience the same game. If in your RPG you slayed the dragon of eternal destruction and got that sword of ultimate awesomeness, the dragon is dead and the sword is claimed, and townspeople will sing praises for you. In an MMO, the dragon respawns a few minutes later and drops another ultimate sword. And nobody talks about it because MMO worlds are static. They cannot change based on the actions of a single person because, well, how should anyone else play them if they did?
Instead it's mostly a matter of cooperative collection of loot.
But that aside, microtransactions have become a pest in games, but only because we let them. There is actually a very, very simple way to not participate in them: Don't buy games that have them. Yes, believe it or not, such games do exist.
Re: (Score:2)
RPG is role-playing game, such as pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons, where, in a limited sense, players act out the sensibilities of their characters. It's questionable if this has any meaning at all in a single-player game.
MMOs inherit from text MUDs, which were live action multiplayer fantasy worlds. You can also roleplay in these, and many online games have RP severs to attempt to gather those who want this additional flourish.
What you call roleplaying is the persistent world concept, where actions ha
Re: (Score:2)
RPG is role-playing game, such as pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons, where, in a limited sense, players act out the sensibilities of their characters. It's questionable if this has any meaning at all in a single-player game.
It has the same amount of meaning as the amount of effort spent providing options with consequences. For all their many failings, Bethesda games tend to have a decent handle on this. Some parts of the game have to happen, others are optional, and some are unavailable depending on who you've allied yourself with or what missions you've completed. Actions with consequences. And you have a limited set of options which are based on your character's characteristics.
What you call roleplaying is the persistent world concept, where actions have consequences out in the world. Almost no MMOs do this. If you see a monster respawn, that ain't it.
When you play paper RPGs, you're probably eithe
Re: (Score:2)
Not gonna happen. No chance in hell. Simply due to the nature of MMOs.
Never noticed how certain places are brimming with activity while others are deserted? And how this shifts time and again with every update, expansion, DLC and content creation? Naturally spreading fauna and flora would pretty much become a problem right out the door, with "nature" overgrowing places that used to be well populated when the majority of players move on. Now, one could say "ok, then the old gathering place becomes a lost cit
Re: (Score:2)
MMOs almost always have some sort of extended 'grind' that you don't see in single player games. The rationale here being that if you finish up all the tasks in the MMO and then there's nothing left to do then you might unsubscribe. To prevent that loss of customer these games will have you earn more reputation with factions, run multiple variants of the same instance to get slightly better gear, play the festival events for a few weeks to earn a goodie or two, and so forth. For a single player RPG you pl
Re: (Score:2)
MMOs used to have even more complicated systems of stats and attributes in the old days (AO anyone?). With most contemporary MMOs, it boils down to 3-4 stats per class (yes, there are like 10 but every class only really uses 3-4 of them). And for those that don't want to do the math, there's usually plenty of guides along the lines of "get this sword from that mob in this dungeon, get that shield from that boss in that dungeon...", so in the end it ain't that difficult either.
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
More than TV? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We're talking market share, not number of people using it. Most people watching TV do so without paying anything but the ridiculous "TV ownership fee". While gamers tend to spend quite a few quid on games every year.
Re: (Score:2)
So TV, film, music, and everything else is less than the 50 of the "entertainment market" (whatever that may be)? I would have thought the millions who watch TV programs outnumber the gamers, not the other way around.
Probably make more money off each gamer though.
Same for the US, sort of (Score:3, Informative)
The numbers are bigger, but that makes sense given populations.
2017 (in USD):
* Movie box office - $11 billion
* The gotcha, home viewing (cable and Netflix for example) - $107 billion
* Music - $18.3 billion
* Books, digital and physical (surprising) - $37 billion
* Video Games - $23 billion
So video games beat out the big screen and music in the US. I believe this has been the case for at least a few years.
https://www.selectusa.gov/medi... [selectusa.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But not really half of the entertainment market.
It's probably complicated to calculate and the statistic at the top of this thread might be skewed. For example:
What if your cellphone bill includes a music streaming service? You're paying for phone service- not music (although clearly a cut of your bill is going to entertainment); I know a lot of services in Europe include music streaming as part of the package- if the phone bill isn't included as part of the entertainment package the statistic is flawed.
You could also say what of Amazon Prime? If you
Re: (Score:2)
* Video Games - $23 billion
So video games beat out the big screen and music in the US. I believe this has been the case for at least a few years.
https://www.selectusa.gov/medi... [selectusa.gov]
Now consider that a lot of people are not paying on a yearly basis, and suddenly the games are taking up a significant mount of usertime. I update Diablo three maybe every other year, and my son has gotten into emulating old school games on a RPi3, essentially paying 30 dollars for a world of games.
And this brings up the fact that you don't have to have the Whizbang Platinum 10 million console to have good gameplay. There are more non-pay options than pay options.
Re: (Score:2)
So people are reading more then watching movies, listening to music or playing video games?
That's a good thing then, right?
Narrow definition (Score:2)
The video games sector now accounts for more than half of the entertainment market in UK, according to new figures. From a report: The Entertainment Retailers Association (ERA) said the gaming market's value rose to $4.85bn,
That's only true if you take a ridiculously narrow definition of the "entertainment market". The English Premier League is unquestionably a form of entertainment and that league alone had revenues of $6.4 billion last year [cnn.com]. And that's just one sport in the UK. Add in all the other lower tier leagues, other sports, etc and it's pretty easy to show that video games are just a piece of the overall pie. I'm not even getting into forms of "entertainment" like drinking and other adult recreation which undoub
Nothing new (Score:2)
Define interactive (Score:2)
From 1950 to 1970, the pinball industry made more money than Hollywood.
Citation needed.
Interactive entertainment has always been more profitable, despite being mostly ignored by the so-called cultural critics.
Define what you mean by interactive entertainment. I realize that sounds obvious but I think it's less obvious than it seems. Professional sports spectating isn't really interactive but it's one of the biggest pieces of the entertainment market - far bigger revenues than the market for actually playing sports. Movies aren't interactive but they are enormous once you include all the revenues and not just the box office. Books aren't interactive but that's a huge industry. Streaming video
Re: (Score:3)
"Special When Lit: A Pinball Documentary (2009)" Note the date range (1950-1970). There was no home market for movies at this point, thus box office was the total.
Participation economy (Score:2)
"Special When Lit: A Pinball Documentary (2009)" Note the date range (1950-1970). There was no home market for movies at this point, thus box office was the total.
There absolutely was a home market for movies during that era. Granted it wasn't anywhere close to what it is today but it certainly existed. TV syndication was a thing even back then and popular movies were often periodically re-released in theaters. Anyway, you cited a documentary which evidently makes the (seemingly unsupported) claim. That's insufficient evidence. I'm not saying your claim is necessarily false but I'll need more than that to believe it to be factual.
If I offered you all the revenue from Professional golf (advertising, tv rights) or the revenue from recreational golf (equipment sales, green fees, etc), which would you choose?
If I'm running a business the an
Music Industry should sue.. (Score:2)
Nothing like half! (Score:2, Insightful)
The video games sector now accounts for more than half of the entertainment market in UK,
... the gaming market's value rose to $4.85bn
... Despite being the youngest of our three sectors, it is now by far the biggest."
However, that amount is smaller than the BBC's budget: £5Bn, or $6Bn. So the reality is that the entire gaming market isn't even bigger than a single broadcaster.
The entertainment market must include TV. Just like it must include films, music, print (yes, there is still some left). If you wanted to stretch it you could probably say restaurants, bars and drugs count as "entertainment", too.
This sounds like someone trying to mislead to gain publicity. They might have meant just the online entertain