http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/64822
Digital distribution accounted for 48% of PC games sold in the USA last year, according to a new report from market research firm The NPD Group.
21.3 million "PC Game full-game digital downloads" were purchased in the USA in 2009 while 23.5 million physical units were bought at retail during the year, according to NPD's figures. DD raked in 48% of unit sales and 36% of dollar sales.
The group also offers its own ranking of the various digital distributors, divided into categories of "casual digital retailers" and those "which often focus on titles that are also offered in retail stores as physical purchases." The ranking supports Direct2Drive's refutation of Impulse's claim that it held second place in the PC DD market, at least.
Top 5 Frontline Digital Retailers - 2009 (based on unit % share) Steampowered.com Direct2Drive.com Blizzard.com EA.com Worldofwarcraft.com Top 5 Casual Digital Retailers - 2009 (based on unit % share) Bigfishgames.com Pogo.com Gamehouse.com iWin.com Realarcade.com
NPD notes that the market share of "Casual Digital Retailers" declined in 2009 over the previous year, which the group speculates is in part due to "the increase in popularity of free social network gaming and free mobile gaming."
"The popularity of social network gaming increased from Q3'09 to Q4'09 as 4.8 million more people played games on a social network in the U.S.," said NPD analyst Anita Frazier. "This demonstrates how consumers can now experience casual types of games through myriad vehicles, broadening the competitive landscape."
Two separate surveys served as the foundation for the report--a quarterly survey of 8,000 members of its "online consumer panel" and a weekly survey of 180,000 members.
This is just estimate because NPD dont have data from Steam, D2D etc.
IMO in 2009 50-60% were bought over digital distribution service.
I think the numbers are from an online survey?
If there were more games at the retail level that you can only get online those numbers wouldn't be so skewed. It's just propoganda media to get more people to buy online instead of in stores so publishers can save even more money and rip us off even more since there are still retail outlets where you can return crappy or defective software.
also impulse has non-game software as well that would add revenue that this survey probably wouldnt cover
I am not really surprised.. If you think about it compared to console gaming. pc has far less shelf representation (which is due to console gaming) .. Take Gamestop for example (full disclosure I work there) in my local big city ( I live in rural Michigan and drive 20 miles to get to work) PC game only cover 2 sides of a 4 x 6 (so 4 eight square feet) gondola while Xbox 360 new cover a 12 x 8 (96 square feet) section of wall.. and another 12 x 8 for used xbox 360.. Heck even the Wii section is large...
So it does not surprised me that we as pc gamers have to get a good chunk of our games through other then brick and mortar stores..
steam sales also tweak the figures somewhat. I've read many a posting where people say they buy games just cuz the price is so low. Hence only 36% of dollar sales despite 48% of unit sales. According to this report, Brick and Mortar still account for 64% of dollar sales. Similar sorta thing is happening with digital books. Digital distribution_is on the rise though. I just think the numbers are somewhat inflated due to sampling methods, free and discounted games, and potential reporting bias.
well, digital downloaded games really should be cheaper... cheaper distribution, no case, no manual, no CD.
You'd think so. But I haven't seen digital release of new_games to be cheaper. Not yet anyway.
As relates to developer and publisher concerns... I think these distribution reports should include a data set relating to new releases only. That report is likely to show that retail beats digital by a long shot. The discounted sales of old games don't impact developers and publishers as much as sales of newly released games. The bulk of the money is still coming from retail shops.
well, the reason they arne't released cheaper is because Brick and Mortar stores would flip out and get pretty angry. I remember one publisher tried to do it and the companies threatened to not carry the game, so they buckled.
So they usually throw in more pre-order bonuses (or free games) instead (Bioshock 1 for free if you preordered Bioshock 2).
You could've Borderlands and Bioshock 2 4packs on release on Steam, meaning the total would be $33 for each person. And yes, Bioshock 2 included Bioshock 1 on top of that if you preordered.
Amazon does a similar thing by offering gift certificate on new releases to get around restrictions.
Some wishful thinking in here. Manufacturers set the prices on consoles, and walmart would be happy to sell the games for pennies if it still made a profit from it. Stores get a MSRP for the software (often suggested by the publisher) and then the stores can charge whatever they want.
Let's not whitewash the game industry by implying that it is evil walmart that makes them expensive. Blizzard, Microsoft, and yes, even Stardock are all companies that need to make money and turn a profit.
Also, NPD has pretty questionable values and sources of data. Brad Wardell would be the first to know what percentage of Stardock's games were bought at a store and what percentage were bought online and he's stated it more than once. Digital distribution is gaining ground but it is not where the majority of sales are made right now.
This is something that should be noted. Online surveys are just so reliable. Not to mention the fact that the people who would be likely to participate in an online survey are probably the same people buying most of their stuff digitally.
Don't you find it kind of silly to point out that the first ste of numbers is an estimate, and then completely make up another set of numbers?
Another note is how small the sample size is. Games are a multibillion dollar industry, you can't get an accurate representation even by 180,000 people even if it was not an online survey (which as you mentioned is strongly biased towards digital already).
Bottom line: NPD doesn't actually have any real data, they're just talking out of their collective asses
While Brick and Mortar may account for 64% still, the margins are much, much lower. That 36% is probably the majority of their revenue already. Retail eats a hell of a lot of profit up in the process of getting it there and having it shelved.
Another note is how small the sample size is. Games are a multibillion dollar industry, you can't get an accurate representation even by 180,000 people even if it was not an online survey (which as you mentioned is strongly biased towards digital already).Bottom line: NPD doesn't actually have any real data, they're just talking out of their collective asses
You can take a decent poll with a relatively small sample size - that's how political polling is done. However, once you factor in their group selection problems the end result is the same: data which makes sexy headlines, but that's about it.
That would be wrong Annatar, 180K people is a quite large sample, no matter how big the market. It could always be bigger of course, but 180K is a good number.
The problem is more the part 'online consumer panel' and 'members'. Depending on how you get into that groups those arent neutral samples. Kyogre12 is probably right with his guess.
180,000 is plenty for an accurate survey and a survey conducted online != the justly-maligned 'online polls'.
there might be some bias in the poll but unless you look at the guts of the beast you have no idea what if anything theyve done to weight the poll and counter that. Every political poll uses a 'likely voter' model, for example...
So is 200k, 250k, 300k, and none of them would be accurate because they're surveying people buying games, not collecting data on games sold. The only way to do an accurate report of this nature is to poll everyone who has bought a game in 2009. Until they reach that number, the sample size is too small for an accurate conclusion.
A political poll isn't the same as this. A better analogy is if a winner during an election was determined by polling 180,000 people and then saying well, one candidate only got 48% of the vote so the other guy wins
No matter how you slice it, the number can't be accurate. The very statement "48% of games sold in 2009 were digital purchases" implies the collection of data on game sales. An survey of *people* is not a collection of data. The method is laughable, and so is their "conclusion".
I disagree completely, Annatar. A large sample can be accurate to within a few %. Human surveys can produce useable data. Is it flawless? Of course not. It's an indicator.
Scientifically speaking, unless the method is explained to its fullest, the numbers are useless.
To me, the data is not relevant. The fact that the data gets presented is relevant. While you may not believe it, others will.
But the data isn't presented correctly. If they said "48% of people surveyed buy their games online", the implication is a lot different than "48% of games are sold online". The former is accurate. The latter is not. A survey is not a valid substitute for sales data.
This is market research, not science.
Looking at sales data isn't science, it's just necessary (and common sense) if you're going to come out out with a claim about sales data.
I don't agree with that. It is equally viable to look at what games were purchased, instead of what games were sold.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
