Maintenance for the week of June 1:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – June 1
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – June 1
Adult women biggest demographic in gaming
-
Grunim✭✭✭✭✭I am a girl gamer
I have giant boobs
I have talent and skill
- and still respect noobs
I am a woman gamer
Am so old my boobs are saggy
I have fun when I kill
-and Azuras is still laggyAm a whimsical Generation Jones gamer. Online RPGs hooked me since '94 and no sign of stopping soon...10 -
Hope499✭✭✭✭IrishGirlGamer wrote: »lordrichter wrote: »Wily_Wizard wrote: »Here's an updated gaming demographic from 2015. You will need a PDF viewer to see it.
There's a lot of interesting info in this report.
http://www.theesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ESA-Essential-Facts-2015.pdf
Interesting what the #4 computer game by units sold was in 2014.
I was reading through your link and found out something that I didnt know existed:
The Elder Scrolls Anthology
I am now going to buy the entire five game set.Maps and all.It has:
Arena
Daggerfall
Morrowind
Oblivion
Skyrim
All in one neat package.It's for sale at Amazon.com.
I was looking at that the other day, too. The only reason I would buy it would be as collector's item, as I already own the games (except Arena), including all the DLC (and yes, horse armor).
Still I might buy it when I get my tax return. Just because it is cool.
You totally should @IrishGirlGamer It's a beautiful set.
Damn...that is nice....
Wish i was a PC gamer right now....Tripped over my friends bra.....
....
....
..she is always setting booby traps!0 -
Lenikus✭✭✭✭✭...Wait, did this thread get re-made with another link to the same Cell Phone app/game "news" article ?... Mai cave. >:31 -
Nestor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭...Wait, did this thread get re-made with another link to the same Cell Phone app/game "news" article ?
Its called the Magic of Google, in that search results have little to do with what your searching for and more to do with advertising.
Anyway, @IrishGirlGamer provided a link to a more informed and recent article on gender and gaming. Post #133 on the previous page.Enjoy the game, life is what you really want to be worried about.
PakKat "Everything was going well, until I died"
Gary Gravestink "I am glad you died, I needed the help"0 -
IrishGirlGamer✭✭✭✭✭
✭...Wait, did this thread get re-made with another link to the same Cell Phone app/game "news" article ?
Its called the Magic of Google, in that search results have little to do with what your searching for and more to do with advertising.
Anyway, @IrishGirlGamer provided a link to a more informed and recent article on gender and gaming. Post #133 on the previous page.
If you're interested in these kinds of things, here is a link to the complete study, which was first published in December of last year:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/gaming-and-gamers/
The study sought to evaluate a number of issues including how the general public views video games and the people who play them, how the public perceives minority and gender representations in video games, and how people view the logical and social benefits of video games.
And yes, the study specifically distinguished between people who play computer and console game versus people who play iPad and tablet/phone games.
If you're interested, there is a complete report of the statistics that you can download.
ADDED:
This is the methodology page for the study:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/methodology-180/
Note that the study sampled 2001 adults, 18 years or older, living in the United States. 701 were interviewed on a landline telephone and 1300 were interview on cell phones. Of the 1300, 749 stated they had no landline service. Interviews were conduct in both English and Spanish.
As much as any survey can be, it was objective and unbiased.
Edited by IrishGirlGamer on February 10, 2016 10:28PMValar Morghulis.
Someday I'm going to put a sword through your eye and out the back of your skull. Arya Stark
You're going to die tomorrow, Lord Bolton. Sleep well. Sansa Stark
If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. Desmond Tutu2 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭IrishGirlGamer wrote: »...Wait, did this thread get re-made with another link to the same Cell Phone app/game "news" article ?
Its called the Magic of Google, in that search results have little to do with what your searching for and more to do with advertising.
Anyway, @IrishGirlGamer provided a link to a more informed and recent article on gender and gaming. Post #133 on the previous page.
If you're interested in these kinds of things, here is a link to the complete study, which was first published in December of last year:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/gaming-and-gamers/
The study sought to evaluate a number of issues including how the general public views video games and the people who play them, how the public perceives minority and gender representations in video games, and how people view the logical and social benefits of video games.
And yes, the study specifically distinguished between people who play computer and console game versus people who play iPad and tablet/phone games.
If you're interested, there is a complete report of the statistics that you can download.
ADDED:
This is the methodology page for the study:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/methodology-180/
Note that the study sampled 2001 adults, 18 years or older, living in the United States. 701 were interviewed on a landline telephone and 1300 were interview on cell phones. Of the 1300, 749 stated they had no landline service. Interviews were conduct in both English and Spanish.
As much as any survey can be, it was objective and unbiased.
I found it troublesome that this study is based on a majority of adults, who do not play video games themselves. So this is more about their (unqualified) opinion than about reality. People who do not play video games have opinions about their idea of what these video games might be like, without to know much about the actual content of those games. Ok, the study declares that this was an opinion poll, so I cannot blame them, but we should have in mind, that the results might not reflect reality but just the opinion of people, where more than half of them have no clue what they are talking about and "made up" their minds based on no evidence.Edited by Lysette on February 10, 2016 10:44PM1 -
IrishGirlGamer✭✭✭✭✭
✭IrishGirlGamer wrote: »...Wait, did this thread get re-made with another link to the same Cell Phone app/game "news" article ?
Its called the Magic of Google, in that search results have little to do with what your searching for and more to do with advertising.
Anyway, @IrishGirlGamer provided a link to a more informed and recent article on gender and gaming. Post #133 on the previous page.
If you're interested in these kinds of things, here is a link to the complete study, which was first published in December of last year:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/gaming-and-gamers/
The study sought to evaluate a number of issues including how the general public views video games and the people who play them, how the public perceives minority and gender representations in video games, and how people view the logical and social benefits of video games.
And yes, the study specifically distinguished between people who play computer and console game versus people who play iPad and tablet/phone games.
If you're interested, there is a complete report of the statistics that you can download.
ADDED:
This is the methodology page for the study:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/methodology-180/
Note that the study sampled 2001 adults, 18 years or older, living in the United States. 701 were interviewed on a landline telephone and 1300 were interview on cell phones. Of the 1300, 749 stated they had no landline service. Interviews were conduct in both English and Spanish.
As much as any survey can be, it was objective and unbiased.
I found it troublesome that this study is based on a majority of adults, who do not play video games themselves. So this is more about their (unqualified) opinion than about reality. People who do not play video games have opinions about their idea of what these video games might be like, without to know much about the actual content of those games. Ok, the study declares that this was an opinion poll, so I cannot blame them, but we should have in mind, that the results might not reflect reality but just the opinion of people, where more than half of them have no clue what they are talking about and "made up" their minds based on no evidence.
I don't think that statement is accurate at all.
Yes, the study is only administered to people 18 years old and older (for legal reasons). Of the 2001 total people polled, 49% stated they played video games and another 51% stated they did not play games (I'm assuming that's how you got your majority).
And you're right: any study results including all participants - the "% of all adults" questions - would certainly include that raw majority (51%) of respondents don't play video games. (Example: % of all adults who think video games are a waste of time would include that 51% that say they don't play video games.) But not all the results of the study are that inclusive.
In fact, a large part of the study includes group specific statistics. An example would be: "25% of those who play games (and 39% of self-identified gamers) think most video games help develop good problem solving and strategic thinking skills, compared with just 8% of those who do not play games." So the study clearly separated results based on whether a participant stated they played video games or not.
Another example would be: 26% of those who play video games (and 35% of self-identified gamers) do not think women are portrayed poorly in most games. Meanwhile, 16% of game players (and 24% of self-identified gamers) think most games do portray women poorly. A majority of those who do not play (55%) video games are unsure what to think on this topic.
The point being that the opinion of the majority (the 51% that don't play games) is clearly not controlling the results of the study. That is a misstatement.
The study is an opinion poll because everyone polled, including the 10% who clearly identify themselves as gamers and the 49% who state they play video games, are still asked "opinion" questions (as opposed to factual questions). The study itself recognizes that the 51% who don't play video games might be speculating when asked to give opinions on questions relating to video games.
If the study didn't, at some point, separate the responses by group (people who play games v. people who don't), then I would say you're right about the unqualified speculation. But since the study clearly produces results based on group responses, then I think your point about unqualified opinions is wrong.
Valar Morghulis.
Someday I'm going to put a sword through your eye and out the back of your skull. Arya Stark
You're going to die tomorrow, Lord Bolton. Sleep well. Sansa Stark
If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. Desmond Tutu4 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭IrishGirlGamer wrote: »IrishGirlGamer wrote: »...Wait, did this thread get re-made with another link to the same Cell Phone app/game "news" article ?
Its called the Magic of Google, in that search results have little to do with what your searching for and more to do with advertising.
Anyway, @IrishGirlGamer provided a link to a more informed and recent article on gender and gaming. Post #133 on the previous page.
If you're interested in these kinds of things, here is a link to the complete study, which was first published in December of last year:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/gaming-and-gamers/
The study sought to evaluate a number of issues including how the general public views video games and the people who play them, how the public perceives minority and gender representations in video games, and how people view the logical and social benefits of video games.
And yes, the study specifically distinguished between people who play computer and console game versus people who play iPad and tablet/phone games.
If you're interested, there is a complete report of the statistics that you can download.
ADDED:
This is the methodology page for the study:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/methodology-180/
Note that the study sampled 2001 adults, 18 years or older, living in the United States. 701 were interviewed on a landline telephone and 1300 were interview on cell phones. Of the 1300, 749 stated they had no landline service. Interviews were conduct in both English and Spanish.
As much as any survey can be, it was objective and unbiased.
I found it troublesome that this study is based on a majority of adults, who do not play video games themselves. So this is more about their (unqualified) opinion than about reality. People who do not play video games have opinions about their idea of what these video games might be like, without to know much about the actual content of those games. Ok, the study declares that this was an opinion poll, so I cannot blame them, but we should have in mind, that the results might not reflect reality but just the opinion of people, where more than half of them have no clue what they are talking about and "made up" their minds based on no evidence.
I don't think that statement is accurate at all.
Yes, the study is only administered to people 18 years old and older (for legal reasons). Of the 2001 total people polled, 49% stated they played video games and another 51% stated they did not play games (I'm assuming that's how you got your majority).
And you're right: any study results including all participants - the "% of all adults" questions - would certainly include that raw majority (51%) of respondents don't play video games. (Example: % of all adults who think video games are a waste of time would include that 51% that say they don't play video games.) But not all the results of the study are that inclusive.
In fact, a large part of the study includes group specific statistics. An example would be: "25% of those who play games (and 39% of self-identified gamers) think most video games help develop good problem solving and strategic thinking skills, compared with just 8% of those who do not play games." So the study clearly separated results based on whether a participant stated they played video games or not.
Another example would be: 26% of those who play video games (and 35% of self-identified gamers) do not think women are portrayed poorly in most games. Meanwhile, 16% of game players (and 24% of self-identified gamers) think most games do portray women poorly. A majority of those who do not play (55%) video games are unsure what to think on this topic.
The point being that the opinion of the majority (the 51% that don't play games) is clearly not controlling the results of the study. That is a misstatement.
The study is an opinion poll because everyone polled, including the 10% who clearly identify themselves as gamers and the 49% who state they play video games, are still asked "opinion" questions (as opposed to factual questions). The study itself recognizes that the 51% who don't play video games might be speculating when asked to give opinions on questions relating to video games.
If the study didn't, at some point, separate the responses by group (people who play games v. people who don't), then I would say you're right about the unqualified speculation. But since the study clearly produces results based on group responses, then I think your point about unqualified opinions is wrong.
Oh they did - precisely even:
adults who play video games 925
adults who do not play video games 1071
I call this the majority of people asked about it do not play video games - and this correct, those are over 50% of the sample size.
And of course they speculate - if they do not play games, how could they possibly know what the actual real content of such a game is?- they judge on what they hear from others and those might be just of the same kind. I give nothing on such an opinion poll, where people are asked who have mainly no clue of what they are talking about and create opinions out of thin air, I call this based on no evidence.Edited by Lysette on February 11, 2016 2:08AM0 -
Volkodav✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭IrishGirlGamer wrote: »IrishGirlGamer wrote: »...Wait, did this thread get re-made with another link to the same Cell Phone app/game "news" article ?
Its called the Magic of Google, in that search results have little to do with what your searching for and more to do with advertising.
Anyway, @IrishGirlGamer provided a link to a more informed and recent article on gender and gaming. Post #133 on the previous page.
If you're interested in these kinds of things, here is a link to the complete study, which was first published in December of last year:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/gaming-and-gamers/
The study sought to evaluate a number of issues including how the general public views video games and the people who play them, how the public perceives minority and gender representations in video games, and how people view the logical and social benefits of video games.
And yes, the study specifically distinguished between people who play computer and console game versus people who play iPad and tablet/phone games.
If you're interested, there is a complete report of the statistics that you can download.
ADDED:
This is the methodology page for the study:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/methodology-180/
Note that the study sampled 2001 adults, 18 years or older, living in the United States. 701 were interviewed on a landline telephone and 1300 were interview on cell phones. Of the 1300, 749 stated they had no landline service. Interviews were conduct in both English and Spanish.
As much as any survey can be, it was objective and unbiased.
I found it troublesome that this study is based on a majority of adults, who do not play video games themselves. So this is more about their (unqualified) opinion than about reality. People who do not play video games have opinions about their idea of what these video games might be like, without to know much about the actual content of those games. Ok, the study declares that this was an opinion poll, so I cannot blame them, but we should have in mind, that the results might not reflect reality but just the opinion of people, where more than half of them have no clue what they are talking about and "made up" their minds based on no evidence.
I don't think that statement is accurate at all.
Yes, the study is only administered to people 18 years old and older (for legal reasons). Of the 2001 total people polled, 49% stated they played video games and another 51% stated they did not play games (I'm assuming that's how you got your majority).
And you're right: any study results including all participants - the "% of all adults" questions - would certainly include that raw majority (51%) of respondents don't play video games. (Example: % of all adults who think video games are a waste of time would include that 51% that say they don't play video games.) But not all the results of the study are that inclusive.
In fact, a large part of the study includes group specific statistics. An example would be: "25% of those who play games (and 39% of self-identified gamers) think most video games help develop good problem solving and strategic thinking skills, compared with just 8% of those who do not play games." So the study clearly separated results based on whether a participant stated they played video games or not.
Another example would be: 26% of those who play video games (and 35% of self-identified gamers) do not think women are portrayed poorly in most games. Meanwhile, 16% of game players (and 24% of self-identified gamers) think most games do portray women poorly. A majority of those who do not play (55%) video games are unsure what to think on this topic.
The point being that the opinion of the majority (the 51% that don't play games) is clearly not controlling the results of the study. That is a misstatement.
The study is an opinion poll because everyone polled, including the 10% who clearly identify themselves as gamers and the 49% who state they play video games, are still asked "opinion" questions (as opposed to factual questions). The study itself recognizes that the 51% who don't play video games might be speculating when asked to give opinions on questions relating to video games.
If the study didn't, at some point, separate the responses by group (people who play games v. people who don't), then I would say you're right about the unqualified speculation. But since the study clearly produces results based on group responses, then I think your point about unqualified opinions is wrong.
Oh they did - precisely even:
adults who play video games 925
adults who do not play video games 1071
I call this the majority of people asked about it do not play video games - and this correct, those are over 50% of the sample size.
And of course they speculate - if they do not play games, how could they possibly know what the actual real content of such a game is?- they judge on what they hear from others and those might be just of the same kind. I give nothing on such an opinion poll, where people are asked who have mainly no clue of what they are talking about and create opinions out of thin air, I call this based on no evidence.
Agreed.The number of people who do NOT play video games differs from those who do to the number of 146.Meaning that the majority by 146 people are people who do not play.0 -
IrishGirlGamer✭✭✭✭✭
✭IrishGirlGamer wrote: »IrishGirlGamer wrote: »...Wait, did this thread get re-made with another link to the same Cell Phone app/game "news" article ?
Its called the Magic of Google, in that search results have little to do with what your searching for and more to do with advertising.
Anyway, @IrishGirlGamer provided a link to a more informed and recent article on gender and gaming. Post #133 on the previous page.
If you're interested in these kinds of things, here is a link to the complete study, which was first published in December of last year:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/gaming-and-gamers/
The study sought to evaluate a number of issues including how the general public views video games and the people who play them, how the public perceives minority and gender representations in video games, and how people view the logical and social benefits of video games.
And yes, the study specifically distinguished between people who play computer and console game versus people who play iPad and tablet/phone games.
If you're interested, there is a complete report of the statistics that you can download.
ADDED:
This is the methodology page for the study:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/methodology-180/
Note that the study sampled 2001 adults, 18 years or older, living in the United States. 701 were interviewed on a landline telephone and 1300 were interview on cell phones. Of the 1300, 749 stated they had no landline service. Interviews were conduct in both English and Spanish.
As much as any survey can be, it was objective and unbiased.
I found it troublesome that this study is based on a majority of adults, who do not play video games themselves. So this is more about their (unqualified) opinion than about reality. People who do not play video games have opinions about their idea of what these video games might be like, without to know much about the actual content of those games. Ok, the study declares that this was an opinion poll, so I cannot blame them, but we should have in mind, that the results might not reflect reality but just the opinion of people, where more than half of them have no clue what they are talking about and "made up" their minds based on no evidence.
I don't think that statement is accurate at all.
Yes, the study is only administered to people 18 years old and older (for legal reasons). Of the 2001 total people polled, 49% stated they played video games and another 51% stated they did not play games (I'm assuming that's how you got your majority).
And you're right: any study results including all participants - the "% of all adults" questions - would certainly include that raw majority (51%) of respondents don't play video games. (Example: % of all adults who think video games are a waste of time would include that 51% that say they don't play video games.) But not all the results of the study are that inclusive.
In fact, a large part of the study includes group specific statistics. An example would be: "25% of those who play games (and 39% of self-identified gamers) think most video games help develop good problem solving and strategic thinking skills, compared with just 8% of those who do not play games." So the study clearly separated results based on whether a participant stated they played video games or not.
Another example would be: 26% of those who play video games (and 35% of self-identified gamers) do not think women are portrayed poorly in most games. Meanwhile, 16% of game players (and 24% of self-identified gamers) think most games do portray women poorly. A majority of those who do not play (55%) video games are unsure what to think on this topic.
The point being that the opinion of the majority (the 51% that don't play games) is clearly not controlling the results of the study. That is a misstatement.
The study is an opinion poll because everyone polled, including the 10% who clearly identify themselves as gamers and the 49% who state they play video games, are still asked "opinion" questions (as opposed to factual questions). The study itself recognizes that the 51% who don't play video games might be speculating when asked to give opinions on questions relating to video games.
If the study didn't, at some point, separate the responses by group (people who play games v. people who don't), then I would say you're right about the unqualified speculation. But since the study clearly produces results based on group responses, then I think your point about unqualified opinions is wrong.
Oh they did - precisely even:
adults who play video games 925
adults who do not play video games 1071
I call this the majority of people asked about it do not play video games - and this correct, those are over 50% of the sample size.
And of course they speculate - if they do not play games, how could they possibly know what the actual real content of such a game is?- they judge on what they hear from others and those might be just of the same kind. I give nothing on such an opinion poll, where people are asked who have mainly no clue of what they are talking about and create opinions out of thin air, I call this based on no evidence.
I'm going to try to explain this one more time and them I'm going to let it go.
"adults who play video games 925
adults who do not play video games 1071"
This statement is correct and I'm not even arguing with that. It was one of the questions on the poll and one of the poll's purposes: to determine how many people within this group plays video games. They got an answer. Let's move on.
From there, the study divides the answers from all polled parties into three sub-groups:
Those who don't play games: the 1071 group
Those who do play games: the 925 group
Those who consider themselves gamers: the 165 group (which is a subgroup included within the 925 group)
This produces a total of 1996 people polled with a standard of deviation of 1.6 percentage points on the poll.
The results are tabulated and the report written based upon which answers are given to which group. So the report can conclude, for example (and this is just one of the study's conclusions), that:
35% of those who play video games (the 921 group) (and 53% of those who identify as gamers (the 165 group)) think most games are not a waste of time. This compares with just 13% of those who do not play video games (the 1071 group).
Those results are valid (and accurate) because they report results based upon what group the answers come from. So 35% of people polled who play video games think most video games are not a waste of time. That statement is true and valid (and revealing) because the group answering the question plays video games
The study also concludes that 13% of the people who don't play video games (the 1071 group) think most video games are not a waste of time. If your point is that this group has no idea what they're talking about, making their answer next to meaningless, then you're probably right. They don't play video games so they don't know what they're on about.
But if your point is that the study and its conclusions are "based on a majority of adults, who do not play video games themselves," then that answer is simply wrong, because the study and its conclusions are based upon answers to questions depending upon which of the two groups (three actually) the answers came from.
And since one of the purposes of the poll is to determine how many Americans play video games, then that was - logically - the first distinction the poll had to make.
Okay, I'm done. Feel troubled if you want. Disregard it if you want. But the study is probably more (1) objective and (2) accurate than any other study of it's nature that I have seen.
Edited by IrishGirlGamer on February 11, 2016 7:16AMValar Morghulis.
Someday I'm going to put a sword through your eye and out the back of your skull. Arya Stark
You're going to die tomorrow, Lord Bolton. Sleep well. Sansa Stark
If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. Desmond Tutu5 -
Rosveen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭In the part that is an opinion poll, even when you ask gamers, you're not going to get any facts set in stone, just more speculations which may or may not be close to the truth. I think it's interesting to see how perception of video games differs between those who play them and those who don't: for example in that question about how games relate to violent behavior. Almost none of us actually know - only those who are familiar with studies on the subjects. The rest of us are just guessing based on personal experience, which is about as credible as me saying smoking is 100% safe because nobody in my family ever had any issues. But the way different groups of people see it, it still tells us something.Edited by Rosveen on February 11, 2016 10:56AM2 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭IrishGirlGamer wrote: »IrishGirlGamer wrote: »IrishGirlGamer wrote: »...Wait, did this thread get re-made with another link to the same Cell Phone app/game "news" article ?
Its called the Magic of Google, in that search results have little to do with what your searching for and more to do with advertising.
Anyway, @IrishGirlGamer provided a link to a more informed and recent article on gender and gaming. Post #133 on the previous page.
If you're interested in these kinds of things, here is a link to the complete study, which was first published in December of last year:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/gaming-and-gamers/
The study sought to evaluate a number of issues including how the general public views video games and the people who play them, how the public perceives minority and gender representations in video games, and how people view the logical and social benefits of video games.
And yes, the study specifically distinguished between people who play computer and console game versus people who play iPad and tablet/phone games.
If you're interested, there is a complete report of the statistics that you can download.
ADDED:
This is the methodology page for the study:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/methodology-180/
Note that the study sampled 2001 adults, 18 years or older, living in the United States. 701 were interviewed on a landline telephone and 1300 were interview on cell phones. Of the 1300, 749 stated they had no landline service. Interviews were conduct in both English and Spanish.
As much as any survey can be, it was objective and unbiased.
I found it troublesome that this study is based on a majority of adults, who do not play video games themselves. So this is more about their (unqualified) opinion than about reality. People who do not play video games have opinions about their idea of what these video games might be like, without to know much about the actual content of those games. Ok, the study declares that this was an opinion poll, so I cannot blame them, but we should have in mind, that the results might not reflect reality but just the opinion of people, where more than half of them have no clue what they are talking about and "made up" their minds based on no evidence.
I don't think that statement is accurate at all.
Yes, the study is only administered to people 18 years old and older (for legal reasons). Of the 2001 total people polled, 49% stated they played video games and another 51% stated they did not play games (I'm assuming that's how you got your majority).
And you're right: any study results including all participants - the "% of all adults" questions - would certainly include that raw majority (51%) of respondents don't play video games. (Example: % of all adults who think video games are a waste of time would include that 51% that say they don't play video games.) But not all the results of the study are that inclusive.
In fact, a large part of the study includes group specific statistics. An example would be: "25% of those who play games (and 39% of self-identified gamers) think most video games help develop good problem solving and strategic thinking skills, compared with just 8% of those who do not play games." So the study clearly separated results based on whether a participant stated they played video games or not.
Another example would be: 26% of those who play video games (and 35% of self-identified gamers) do not think women are portrayed poorly in most games. Meanwhile, 16% of game players (and 24% of self-identified gamers) think most games do portray women poorly. A majority of those who do not play (55%) video games are unsure what to think on this topic.
The point being that the opinion of the majority (the 51% that don't play games) is clearly not controlling the results of the study. That is a misstatement.
The study is an opinion poll because everyone polled, including the 10% who clearly identify themselves as gamers and the 49% who state they play video games, are still asked "opinion" questions (as opposed to factual questions). The study itself recognizes that the 51% who don't play video games might be speculating when asked to give opinions on questions relating to video games.
If the study didn't, at some point, separate the responses by group (people who play games v. people who don't), then I would say you're right about the unqualified speculation. But since the study clearly produces results based on group responses, then I think your point about unqualified opinions is wrong.
Oh they did - precisely even:
adults who play video games 925
adults who do not play video games 1071
I call this the majority of people asked about it do not play video games - and this correct, those are over 50% of the sample size.
And of course they speculate - if they do not play games, how could they possibly know what the actual real content of such a game is?- they judge on what they hear from others and those might be just of the same kind. I give nothing on such an opinion poll, where people are asked who have mainly no clue of what they are talking about and create opinions out of thin air, I call this based on no evidence.
I'm going to try to explain this one more time and them I'm going to let it go.
"adults who play video games 925
adults who do not play video games 1071"
This statement is correct and I'm not even arguing with that. It was one of the questions on the poll and one of the poll's purposes: to determine how many people within this group plays video games. They got an answer. Let's move on.
From there, the study divides the answers from all polled parties into three sub-groups:
Those who don't play games: the 1071 group
Those who do play games: the 925 group
Those who consider themselves gamers: the 165 group (which is a subgroup included within the 925 group)
This produces a total of 1996 people polled with a standard of deviation of 1.6 percentage points on the poll.
The results are tabulated and the report written based upon which answers are given to which group. So the report can conclude, for example (and this is just one of the study's conclusions), that:
35% of those who play video games (the 921 group) (and 53% of those who identify as gamers (the 165 group)) think most games are not a waste of time. This compares with just 13% of those who do not play video games (the 1071 group).
Those results are valid (and accurate) because they report results based upon what group the answers come from. So 35% of people polled who play video games think most video games are not a waste of time. That statement is true and valid (and revealing) because the group answering the question plays video games
The study also concludes that 13% of the people who don't play video games (the 1071 group) think most video games are not a waste of time. If your point is that this group has no idea what they're talking about, making their answer next to meaningless, then you're probably right. They don't play video games so they don't know what they're on about.
But if your point is that the study and its conclusions are "based on a majority of adults, who do not play video games themselves," then that answer is simply wrong, because the study and its conclusions are based upon answers to questions depending upon which of the two groups (three actually) the answers came from.
And since one of the purposes of the poll is to determine how many Americans play video games, then that was - logically - the first distinction the poll had to make.
Okay, I'm done. Feel troubled if you want. Disregard it if you want. But the study is probably more (1) objective and (2) accurate than any other study of it's nature that I have seen.
It is an opinion poll and nothing what would be any near to being objective - it is totally subjective - what does "waste of time" even mean? Anyone can see this differently, that is not something objective, but a purely subjective thing, what you see as waste of time and what not. And when it comes to opinions about if games create violence or not, it gets totally blown out of the a$$, because this is pure opinion, there is no evidence whatsoever in one or the other direction.
Edit: not even the kind of video game was matter to the study, so anyone can have other games in mind when he/she is giving his/her opinions. And you call this objective?- Opinions are just that, opinions, they are not objective.Edited by Lysette on February 11, 2016 10:48AM0 -
Path✭✭✭✭✭So...about those that report they do not play video games, I wonder what percent are lying?Fairy Tales Really Do Come True...Kinda.1 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭So...about those that report they do not play video games, I wonder what percent are lying?
Hm, that has some truth to it, I would as well not officially claim in the real world to be a gamer or be seen as one - this would be quite bad for my credit ranking. Gamers count as unreliable, because they are thrown in the same category as gamblers, and I do not want that tag on my bank record, I pay rather low interest rates and I want them to stay that way.Edited by Lysette on February 17, 2016 6:01PM0 -
Gothlander✭✭✭✭Yeah, I been ganked by one and she took half of my shizPAWS (Positively Against Wrip-off Stuff) - Say No to Crown Crates!
TESO needs a wardrobe system badly. Something similar to WoW's tmog system would make this game one of the best mmorpg out there!0 -
Rosveen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
Not sure if serious...So...about those that report they do not play video games, I wonder what percent are lying?
Hm, that has some truth to it, I would as well not officially claim in the real world to be a gamer or be seen as one - this would be quite bad for my credit ranking. Gamers count as unreliable, because they are thrown in the same category as gamblers, and I do not want that tag on my bank record, I pay rather low interest rates and I want them to stay that way.Edited by Rosveen on February 17, 2016 6:17PM1 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Not sure if serious...So...about those that report they do not play video games, I wonder what percent are lying?
Hm, that has some truth to it, I would as well not officially claim in the real world to be a gamer or be seen as one - this would be quite bad for my credit ranking. Gamers count as unreliable, because they are thrown in the same category as gamblers, and I do not want that tag on my bank record, I pay rather low interest rates and I want them to stay that way.
I am very serious about this - we work in biotech and a laboratory with all it's sub-buildings costs in the tens of millions dollars, we needed a proper A+ rating to get credit in this amount at all and we have to maintain this rating in order to get (one of) the lowest interest rates. I cannot let my reputation be messed up with dirty spots like "gamer" or "gambler" on it.0 -
Grunim✭✭✭✭✭So...about those that report they do not play video games, I wonder what percent are lying?
Hm, that has some truth to it, I would as well not officially claim in the real world to be a gamer or be seen as one - this would be quite bad for my credit ranking. Gamers count as unreliable, because they are thrown in the same category as gamblers, and I do not want that tag on my bank record, I pay rather low interest rates and I want them to stay that way.
I think that's silly that you are worried that creditors put video gamers in the same category as gamblers. I don't think you have anything to worry about with creditors mixing up people who enjoy MMORPGs with people who lose it all in Vegas.Edited by Grunim on February 17, 2016 7:37PMAm a whimsical Generation Jones gamer. Online RPGs hooked me since '94 and no sign of stopping soon...1 -
Rosveen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
What bank even checks this kind of thing? How would they check it? And why on earth would they? They don't just pull risk factors out of thin air, they must have some basis for each of them, so what studies prove that gaming is a problem? If you don't mind, I'd like to know where you live that you deal with absurd rules like this.
Not sure if serious...So...about those that report they do not play video games, I wonder what percent are lying?
Hm, that has some truth to it, I would as well not officially claim in the real world to be a gamer or be seen as one - this would be quite bad for my credit ranking. Gamers count as unreliable, because they are thrown in the same category as gamblers, and I do not want that tag on my bank record, I pay rather low interest rates and I want them to stay that way.
I am very serious about this - we work in biotech and a laboratory with all it's sub-buildings costs in the tens of millions dollars, we needed a proper A+ rating to get credit in this amount at all and we have to maintain this rating in order to get (one of) the lowest interest rates. I cannot let my reputation be messed up with dirty spots like "gamer" or "gambler" on it.1 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
What bank even checks this kind of thing? How would they check it? And why on earth would they? They don't just pull risk factors out of thin air, they must have some basis for each of them, so what studies prove that gaming is a problem? If you don't mind, I'd like to know where you live that you deal with absurd rules like this.
Not sure if serious...So...about those that report they do not play video games, I wonder what percent are lying?
Hm, that has some truth to it, I would as well not officially claim in the real world to be a gamer or be seen as one - this would be quite bad for my credit ranking. Gamers count as unreliable, because they are thrown in the same category as gamblers, and I do not want that tag on my bank record, I pay rather low interest rates and I want them to stay that way.
I am very serious about this - we work in biotech and a laboratory with all it's sub-buildings costs in the tens of millions dollars, we needed a proper A+ rating to get credit in this amount at all and we have to maintain this rating in order to get (one of) the lowest interest rates. I cannot let my reputation be messed up with dirty spots like "gamer" or "gambler" on it.
Well, I do not want to go into details with this - all I wanted to say with it (as a reply to what was asked) is, there are reasons why someone would want to hide the truth about his/her gaming behavior.
How would they check it?- Well, if you are using non-anonymous payment methods (like credit cards, paypal ect), then the name of the receiver appears on the bank record as billing information - and voila it is documented, that you paid for gaming purposes. And from there to assume that you might be a gambler or at least waste your time on gaming instead to care for proper income is not really a far step. And once reputation is lost, it cannot be repaired. It is like virginity.
Edit: just for clarification, I am not talking about normal consumer credit here, but business credit in the multi-million dollar range, there it is a totally different kind of game.
Why would they check it?- Because they have 100% of the risk to take - they finance to 90%, we have 10% in and take it out as soon as the deal is made, no risk for us, whatsoever, all is on the bank - they have to trust us to make this deal.Edited by Lysette on February 18, 2016 4:34AM0 -
Milktray✭✭✭It's been close balance between male/female gamers for over a decade and the average age hasn't changed much either .. how is this news?ZoS please understand everyone thinks and pronounces things differently, so please add to your 'rules' that things get removed if the Mod doesn't actually quite understand phrasing0
-
MerkzM8✭✭✭Feminists and White Knights in the same discussion...
Oh no...
End me!"What is better, to be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?" - Paarthurnax0
yeah sure you are, and Azura is not laggy 
