Nielsen now measuring game console usage. Wii in third place...PS3 in fifth.

[Gothic Walrus]

http://www.nielsen.com/media/toptens_games.html

The list is below; the numbers in parentheses represent "usage minutes percentage," or which percentage of all measured console usage minutes correspond to each system.

PlayStation 2 (30.2)
Xbox 360 (18.3)
Wii (13.5)
Xbox (9.1)
PlayStation 3 (7.7)
GameCube (4.4)
Other (16.9)


As mentioned in the link, this data was from October 2008. This is one month's worth of data, and this is the most recent set of data Nielsen has released on their website.

[ToadallyAwesome]

Wow. Xbox is higher than I thought and Gamecube is lower. That minute% is probably all Halo/Halo2.

Maybe I just missed it but I couldn't find any info on what time period the data was taken. Is this over the entire console life? If so then I guess it is not that surprising to see xbox over ps3.

[Gothic Walrus]

Maybe I just missed it but I couldn't find any info on what time period the data was taken. Is this over the entire console life? If so then I guess it is not that surprising to see xbox over ps3.

This is for October 2008 - one month's worth of data, collected well after each system has had time to get an install base.

[jer7583]

Yeah pretty sad that xbox playtime still beats out PS3's..

[Quillion]

We measure everything. :)

[lilboo]

These things are so stupid.
Just because you survey like "x" people doesn't necessarily mean that "x" gets more playtime than ""x"

But if they tickle people, then great! ::dmk smiles inside::

[jer7583]

Yeah it's not the most accurate thing ever. I'd say it would be easily dismiss able if the xbox/ps3 numbers were closer.

[dmaul1114]

Nielsen is pretty widespread and reliable though--assuming the game use is being measured in every house that has Nielsen boxes for TV ratings.

If it's reliable enough to determine advertising rates and what shows get cancelled etc. then its good enough for use in pointless video game fanboy wars!! :D

[Chase]

*sits*

*waits for horde of angry PS3 fanboys*

---

I regard Nielsen ratings as having little credibility. Nielsen ratings do not accurately represent the whole as the system only surveys a small fraction of the population.

That said, I find it plausible that the Wii would be low in a survey that measures usage.

[gindias]

These numbers are all backwards at my house, our Wii just sits there and flashes blue every now and then. Our PS2 is somewhere upstairs I think and we play only on our PS3 and 360, about 60/40 on that as well. Guess we arent normal in these parts or Nielsen has it wrong like they always have in the past.

[dmaul1114]

I regard Nielsen ratings as having little credibility. Nielsen ratings do not accurately represent the whole as the system only surveys a small fraction of the population.


Well, to be fair all surveys are based on the idea that a relatively small sample can be pretty accurate of a large population.

Look at the state polls before the election. Pretty small samples (often around 1000) and they were pretty damn accurate.

I'm not sure how wide spread Nielsen boxes are, but you can have pretty small samples to get a pretty accurate measure of population trends. Though I always wondered if people with Nielsen boxes let having a box affect what they watch--i.e. may not turn on the titty flick or a trashy reality show when they know someone is tracking what they watch.

[ninja dog]

*sits*

*waits for horde of angry PS3 fanboys*

---



I'll get everything out of the way: Nielsen, CNN, the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Times are all a bunch of fanboys with no credibility.

I mean,. Nielsen is only one of the largest polling firms in the U.S.

[jman619]

Yeah pretty sad that xbox playtime still beats out PS3's..

I could say the same thing about ps2 over 360. Since PS2 is higher. I can't hardly believe this in a way. The wii is even higher than the ps3, and the wii isn't really worth playing. I would know mine has been collecting dust for 3 months now.

[Chase]

Good point, Dmaul. :-k And ninja dog, you are a joy. :lol: Yeah, that CNN, and their know-nothing-ness!

*takes it to the street Doobie Brothers style*

[MSUHitman]

Working next door to a Gamestop, I can believe this as 75% of the customers that go in there only look at Wii/DS/PS2 games. The hardest hit sections are the $15 and under XBox 1/PS2 used bins.

I would also say the vast majority of XBox 1 time is related to Halo 1/2, maybe Madden also. EA still made a Madden 09 for the XBox 1 this year.

I'm usually one of the few people who look at the PS3 games in there. For those that can afford it, it's a great system. But until it hits the $300 price point, sales will continue to flounder, especially now as stand-alone Blu-Ray players are getting $200 and under.

[naes]

I thought it would look like this:

PS2
Wii
360
PS3

The fact that the PS3 is behind the Xbox 1 is real shocking.

[Vinny]

How exactly do they track this information? And what is the methodology? Anyone know?

[Gothic Walrus]

I could say the same thing about ps2 over 360. Since PS2 is higher. I can't hardly believe this in a way.

Why?

Not everybody has the money to upgrade to the newest, shiniest game console. Not everyone WANTS to upgrade. There are a lot of people that are still perfectly happy with last generation's (significantly cheaper) hardware and games. Why do you think they're still pushing new PS2 bundles?

How exactly do they track this information? And what is the methodology? Anyone know?

I haven't found that yet. As far as I know, this is the first month they've released data for console usage.

[lilboo]

:rofl: I can't wait for TMK to read this. Shit is going to go down!!

[62t]

you have to wonder what "other" is. Interesting to see old school gaming made up a large chunk of gaming time.

[jman619]

@ Gothic I can see why that sounds strange I wasn't clear. I can see how ps2 was on top. It was my favorite last gen, and I played the crap out of it. I can understand people don't have the money. I had to borrow money to buy a ps3 myself it isn't cheap. When I typed I can't hardly believe this. I should have explained it. I couldn't believe certain consoles are where they was. It doesn't shock me about the ps2 being over the rest.


@lilboo Mana will defend the ps3 as always, and have some big explanation on why the ps3 is in the fifth spot.

[lilboo]

I know, I'm really excited to see. Maybe he's still writing his response? Who knows. ::popcorn::

[FlipSide]

No suprise about PS2, I'd still play mine If I didn't have BC on my PS3. Same thing could be said with 360, it is the #1 console this generation. But the gap between #1 and #2 should be closer in real life. As for Wii being #3..I think most of us here in CAG has their Wii gathering dust..numbers should be lower in real life..

[naes]

You all are asking for it. Mana is currently typing his response in MS Word, he's on page 3 right now.

Size 8 font.
Single spacing.

[jman619]

You all are asking for it. Mana is currently typing his response in MS Word, he's on page 3 right now.

Size 8 font.
Single spacing.

He told me on msn he wasn't going to reply, but for some reason I think he will.

[ninja dog]

5th is all a part of Sony's strategy. It was their plan to trail behind the Xbox 1 at the half.

[Gothic Walrus]

These numbers are all backwards at my house, our Wii just sits there and flashes blue every now and then. Our PS2 is somewhere upstairs I think and we play only on our PS3 and 360, about 60/40 on that as well. Guess we arent normal in these parts or Nielsen has it wrong like they always have in the past.

First off: no, we are NOT normal. The "normal" population doesn't talk about video games on message boards, rush out to buy titles on day one, or spend nearly as much time or money on gaming as most of this site's users do. We are (and always will be) the minority when it comes to gaming.

I'm curious as to what you mean be Nielsen being "wrong." Regardless of whether or not you agree with them, you don't get to be the largest media research group in the world without doing something right. Take TV for an example - their data is used to make decisions on which shows survive or are canceled, with millions of dollars hanging in the balance. If Nielsen was consistently wrong, don't you think another polling group would have sprung up by now to take their place?

No poll is ever perfect. I'm not saying that they're right, mind you (and won't until I can find information on their methodology for this data set), but saying they're wrong because they don't match your personal usage habits is a pretty bold assertion. I'd put more faith in Nielsen than in...say, posts like this:

As for Wii being #3..I think most of us here in CAG has their Wii gathering dust..numbers should be lower in real life..

[The Mana Knight]

I seriously do not know why Nielson got into measuring video games. For one, households have various income levels. For TV, almost every freaking person has at least one TV. Whether the TV be a fancy HDTV or a black and white TV, people have a TV. They can still watch the same channels. The main divide is whether someone has cable or no cable.

The big issue is, what type of demographic, age group, income level, etc. are they doing this testing in for an example? When I was around the town adjacent to my college town, you really didn't see many PS3 consoles sell because the overall income level in that city was low. In another town which was high class, PS3 consoles would sell out all the time. If they are trying to measure kids for an example, how many of them would actually own a PS3 (It's a $400 device, and most parents wouldn't buy it for their kids). Does this rating also factor in whether someone is using their PS3 to play a PS2 game, Wii to play a GC game, or 360 to play an Xbox game (are they counting it as the console it's on or the previous console, because I only many who only use their 360 for Halo 3 and Halo 2). Also, are they factoring in those who have hacked original Xbox consoles playing non-Xbox games on it? How many percentage of the sample size actually owns a PS3, PS2, Wii, 360, etc.? How many of those people own multiple consoles and what are they playing each.

IMO, if Nielson IS going to do the ratings, they might as well split everything up with various console combinations. Like if someone owns a PS2 and Wii only, measure that specific group on what they are playing. If Someone owns a PS3, 360, Wii, PS2, Xbox, GC, and pretty much everything, measure what percentage of each console is being turned on. Although the PS2 may have a very high percentage, is it measuring whether someone is playing a newly released game or an older game? In the year 2007, we were mostly seeing PS2 versions of games outsell the PS3 one (like for Madden, NCAA, Guitar Hero, etc.), while this year (unless it's a younger audience game like Lego Batman), we are seeing the PS3 version outsell the PS2 one does that really mean there are still people buying many PS2 games? I don't think so because more PS3 games sold in 2008 than PS2). Also there is to consider, are they measuring one console per household or multiple (some kids have a PS2 for themselves, but live in the same house) while they might have to share a PS3, 360, or whatever in the living room.

I can easily think of 1 billion flaws with this measurement. This is almost like the Japanese most wanted list from Famitsu. I remember Lost Odyssey being near the top of the list, yet it sold like 50k in the first week of release. Wii Fit wasn't even listed yet it sold a crazy number of copies and is close to around 3 million now (while LO topped to around 100K). ToV (360) I believe was higher on the list than WKC (PS3), yet WKC outsold ToV in a few days. Unless you are measuring every single person out there with a game console, the results are never accurate.

The presidential election for an example kept showing McCain very close in polls, but was the election really close? Not really, it was mostly a blowout (especially when looking at the electoral vote). Almost every sample size showed McCain winning my state but Obama did.

That's why I'm trying to prove, you just can't accurately measure this stuff. If 200 CAGs were chosen at random to take part in a game console survey, I pretty much guarantee you it would be hard to make accurate. It might draw 200 huge 360 fans, or maybe even 150 big PS3 fans and 50 big Wii fans.

There's also not everyone wants to participate in Nielsen. I remember when they called my apartment several times trying to get me to take part in monitoring what I watch on TV. I kept telling them I do NOT watch TV much. Then they were like did I have children of wife who watched the TV. I basically called them tons of nasty words and hung up. They still called back a few times, but eventually gave up. I wouldn't want to mess with Nielsen measuring my stuff.

Oh yeah, I forgot. Is Nielsen actually measuring just disc games being played, disc + downloads, or just when a console being turned on? Some just use their PS2 for a DVD player, some use 360 for media streaming, some use PS3 for blu-ray, some use Wii to look at the weather, some use Xbox for various media stuff, etc. Way too flawed.

[lilboo]

Surprisingly, that IS a good point TMK :-?
If people are using their Wii to play GCN games, and 360 for Xbox and PS3 for PS2 games.

[jman619]

I seriously do not know why Nielson got into measuring video games. For one, households have various income levels. For TV, almost every freaking person has at least one TV. Whether the TV be a fancy HDTV or a black and white TV, people have a TV. They can still watch the same channels. The main divide is whether someone has cable or no cable.

The big issue is, what type of demographic, age group, income level, etc. are they doing this testing in for an example? When I was around the town adjacent to my college town, you really didn't see many PS3 consoles sell because the overall income level in that city was low. In another town which was high class, PS3 consoles would sell out all the time. If they are trying to measure kids for an example, how many of them would actually own a PS3 (It's a $400 device, and most parents wouldn't buy it for their kids). Does this rating also factor in whether someone is using their PS3 to play a PS2 game, Wii to play a GC game, or 360 to play an Xbox game (are they counting it as the console it's on or the previous console, because I only many who only use their 360 for Halo 3 and Halo 2). Also, are they factoring in those who have hacked original Xbox consoles playing non-Xbox games on it? How many percentage of the sample size actually owns a PS3, PS2, Wii, 360, etc.? How many of those people own multiple consoles and what are they playing each.

IMO, if Nielson IS going to do the ratings, they might as well split everything up with various console combinations. Like if someone owns a PS2 and Wii only, measure that specific group on what they are playing. If Someone owns a PS3, 360, Wii, PS2, Xbox, GC, and pretty much everything, measure what percentage of each console is being turned on. Although the PS2 may have a very high percentage, is it measuring whether someone is playing a newly released game or an older game? In the year 2007, we were mostly seeing PS2 versions of games outsell the PS3 one (like for Madden, NCAA, Guitar Hero, etc.), while this year (unless it's a younger audience game like Lego Batman), we are seeing the PS3 version outsell the PS2 one does that really mean there are still people buying many PS2 games? I don't think so because more PS3 games sold in 2008 than PS2). Also there is to consider, are they measuring one console per household or multiple (some kids have a PS2 for themselves, but live in the same house) while they might have to share a PS3, 360, or whatever in the living room.

I can easily think of 1 billion flaws with this measurement. This is almost like the Japanese most wanted list from Famitsu. I remember Lost Odyssey being near the top of the list, yet it sold like 50k in the first week of release. Wii Fit wasn't even listed yet it sold a crazy number of copies and is close to around 3 million now (while LO topped to around 100K). ToV (360) I believe was higher on the list than WKC (PS3), yet WKC outsold ToV in a few days. Unless you are measuring every single person out there with a game console, the results are never accurate.

*knew he would post something anyway* What you mentioned eariler about kids being more interested in a wii, and it being cheaper makes sense. I also think it has to do with Sony's bad marketing skills or the lack there of I should say.

[The Mana Knight]

*knew he would post something anyway* What you mentioned eariler about kids being more interested in a wii, and it being cheaper makes sense. I also think it has to do with Sony's bad marketing skills or the lack there of I should say.You also have to understand that the U.S. IS the market PS3 has the smallest market percentage. But it's not just that, why is PS2 still leading by a great majority when games aren't selling? Like I said before, tons and tons of uncertainties with a survey.

I could also add, if they were measuring CAGs, 360 would probably win. If they were measuring Gametrailers forums, PS3 would probably win. If they were measuring GameFAQs, there would probably be a high percentage of Wii consoles on.

[jman619]

You also have to understand that the U.S. IS the market PS3 has the smallest market percentage. But it's not just that, why is PS2 still leading by a great majority when games aren't selling? Like I said before, tons and tons of uncertainties with a survey.

Don't worry Mana you know I like Sony. I don't think they market stuff as well as Microsoft does.

[Gothic Walrus]

But it's not just that, why is PS2 still leading by a great majority when games aren't selling?

That's easy: used games. When Grand Theft Auto, Gran Turismo, and virtually every other Greatest Hits title can be had for ten bucks or less at GameStop, there's plenty to do with a PS2.

The presidential election for an example kept showing McCain very close in polls, but was the election really close? Not really, it was mostly a blowout (especially when looking at the electoral vote). Almost every sample size showed McCain winning my state but Obama did.

That comes down to the individual poll in question. With the lone exception of Indiana (I know...your state), FiveThirtyEight (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/) was able to project the election almost flawlessly, and some of the national polls were close.

So...yes, you CAN predict these things.

Is Nielsen actually measuring just disc games being played, disc + downloads, or just when a console being turned on? Some just use their PS2 for a DVD player, some use 360 for media streaming, some use PS3 for blu-ray, some use Wii to look at the weather, some use Xbox for various media stuff, etc. Way too flawed.

Given all of the things that modern consoles can do, I'd imagine that it's just "console on" and "console off" that's being measured. Anything other than that would require much more invasive data collection. If that wasn't the case, I would assume they'd have individual game data available for platforms other than the PC.

If we assume that's the case, then the PS3's numbers might actually be lower than reported when it comes to actual gaming because of the number of people who bought one primarily for a media server or a blu-ray player.

IMO, if Nielson IS going to do the ratings, they might as well split everything up with various console combinations. Like if someone owns a PS2 and Wii only, measure that specific group on what they are playing. If Someone owns a PS3, 360, Wii, PS2, Xbox, GC, and pretty much everything, measure what percentage of each console is being turned on.

That would lead to mountains of useless data. If someone has a PS2 and a Wii...well, who cares? If people with PS3s and 360s used their PS3 more often than people with PS3s, 360s, and Wiis, what does that mean? And how would you extract anything meaningful from that jumbled data set?

[SNAKE EYES EX]

It's hard to imagine that people would rather play Wii Play all day than Metal Gear Solid 4, but heh, each to his own.

[ninja dog]

I can easily think of 1 billion flaws with this measurement.

No you can't since you don't know how they got these ratings. You can think of potential problems. And the questions you're wondering about Nielsen data are things they would account for--like income brackets, ages, usage, etc. Anyway, this is Nielsen, their TV rankings are one of the biggest factors in how TV stations decide what to show.

I'm not saying these numbers are indisputably correct, but it's not like they pulled these numbers from their ass.

Sony fans are taking down some of the world's bigger institutions lately-- WSJ, NYT, now Nielsen. :lol: Next up: FDA Says PS3 Emits Unhealthy Levels of Radiation. Sony fans: FDA's geiger counter is a fan boy!

[mykevermin]

Marked. I really want to read up on their research methodology, because I'm immediately skeptical of it. Not because of the results, but because of the complexity of the market.

WoW in 1st place w/ PC, averaging 9+ hours of play per week? That's the *average*?

Yikes.

[Loonknight]

In my opinion, Nielsen should stick to rating TV shows and not video games for many of the same reasons Mana pointed out. Not everyone has the same options and if the subject doesn't have the same conditions there is no way to rate the output properly.

Just about everyone has a TV in one shape or another, not everyone has all the consoles that were being surveyed.

In short, data is unreliable and skewed. Not to mention that mykevermin is right there is no PC coverage as well.

[Bloodbooger]

Why?

Not everybody has the money to upgrade to the newest, shiniest game console. Not everyone WANTS to upgrade. There are a lot of people that are still perfectly happy with last generation's (significantly cheaper) hardware and games. Why do you think they're still pushing new PS2 bundles?


QFT. I came in to say this^

I actually think this makes sense, there's a lot of people out there that can't afford to drop a wad of cash down for a console. Gamecube could have lower numbers because of the Wii's BC as well.

We're a lucky minority.

And my niece loves playing on my Wii (insert pedo jokes), that's a huge part of the audience, not CAGs.

[TahoeMax]

I also wonder about the backwards compatibility factor here. For my part, I know that I probably spent about 75% of my Wii time playing Gamecube games after the first few weeks, 60% of my PS3 time with PS2/PSX games, and maybe 10% of my 360 time playing Xbox games. I can't imagine that they can accurately measure that, so depending on how peoples' usage is split, it could really mess up the results here...and probably has.

[Bloodbooger]

I seriously do not know why Nielson ....

Stop complicating life.

[dopa345]

Does it take into account if the console is used for DVD/ Blu-Ray viewing? My brother for example uses a PS2 to watch DVD's and my wife and I use my PS2 as a DVD player as well but I no longer play games on it so it would be misleading if the survey was trying to look at console gameplaying.

[dmaul1114]

Good point. Would look even worse from a gameplaying standpoint for the PS3 since so much of the use is for Blu Ray since so many people use it as a BR player compared to other consoles.

The PS2 is a pretty shitty DVD player and the 360 isn't great either, while the PS3 is a very good Blu Ray player and DVD upconverter, factor in how cheap stand alone DVD players have been for years....

[mykevermin]

Y'all bring up so many complexities that express just why I'd like to read their research methods. Some very good points all around.

[dmaul1114]

Definitely. I'd like to know how they did it as well.

Even if its just time turned on, it's still an interesting metric as it at least shows which are getting used the most regardless of activity. So to some extent it would be a metric of which was the best value I guess.

I don't care one way or the other who's on top etc., I just like looking at trends being a social researcher and all.

[QiG]

Since I know I'm not the only one too lazy to click the link, I'll post this:
http://www.gamecyte.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/nielsen-gaming-pc-games-08-small.jpg

Interesting results, and I'd just like to note that Nielsen boxes are in about what.. 20,000 homes compared to the 110+ million TVs in the US? These results represent about .002 percent of the population if my numbers are close. I don't doubt that this is way off and that it gives a reasonable representation, but don't hesitate to question any survey that only takes a sample of a population because you have no idea what the margin of error is.

[Quillion]

I'll drop in to add my two cents, now that the discussion has come full circle.

I work for Nielsen, but I can't give insight on methodologies for the studies about video games, I don't work in that group. I can put in a request to learn more, but it will take forever. What I will say is that we measure everything. We have divisions measuring comments on blogs, media and advertising exposure on websites, exposure to billboards, every item scanned in almost every retail store (that's my group) and even what the buzz is on youtube videos and viral marketing.

It is conceivably possible that our data is wrong. It is however incredibly unlikely. I've attended a number of instructional sessions regarding the various Nielsen Media groups, and consistently come away impressed.

I will dig around our internal portal on Monday if this thread is still alive, and see If I can't at least get you fellas the contact information of the group that does this research.

[hiccupleftovers]

I'm just interested as to why the DS/PSP aren't included. I'm sure that the DS, with its massive owner base, would probably the top spot, or incredibly close to it. I still see plenty of young children/adult using the GBA SP so I'd think that would have good margin. Even PC gaming, casual (online such as kongregate,etc.) or otherwise (hardcore, etc.), isn't include. What a bunk survey.

[Chase]

Thanks for the insight, Quillion. :-k

[dmaul1114]

I'm just interested as to why the DS/PSP aren't included. I'm sure that the DS, with its massive owner base, would probably the top spot, or incredibly close to it. I still see plenty of young children/adult using the GBA SP so I'd think that would have good margin. Even PC gaming, casual (online such as kongregate,etc.) or otherwise (hardcore, etc.), isn't include. What a bunk survey.

Could be the methodology. i.e. maybe they are measuring this through the Nielson boxes hooked up to TVs if they've been changed to detect when a console is on. Thus portables and PC gaming couldn't be measured.

But who knows if that's how they do it since there's apparently nothing out their on their methodology.

[Quillion]

Thanks for the insight, Quillion. :-k
Hey, I'll dig up what I can when I can. I just wanted to say that I will bring more information.

[mykevermin]

If I can't at least get you fellas the contact information of the group that does this research.

Please please please (and thank you)!

At the very least, it will help make sense of the % of time used metric. As others point out, it's a strange measure since we aren't given an understanding of how to interpret it. Owning all 3 consoles (5 if you count my boxed up Xbox and PS2), I have the *opportunity* to divide my time between the consoles. Were I to only own, say, a Wii, it would be 100% of my gaming time, whether a minute a week or 30 hours.

And maybe I can see if they're hiring, since the academic market is ten kinds of fucked. ;)

[Quillion]

Could be the methodology. i.e. maybe they are measuring this through the Nielson boxes hooked up to TVs if they've been changed to detect when a console is on. Thus portables and PC gaming couldn't be measured.

But who knows if that's how they do it since there's apparently nothing out their on their methodology.
The boxes detect watermarks in the signal sent to the TV, so that they can properly account for time-shifted viewing. It is conceivable that games could be watermarked as well, however it's unlikely.

This data is probably coming from our panel services. We have 125,000 households in the US who track purchases at all retailers, and they track other behaviors as well. Those households are selected at random, from specific needs in our sample (lacking this-or that particular demographic) and aren't allowed to serve for more than two years. Also, any data they provide is factored and considered against the other data sources to ensure accuracy.

[mykevermin]

Could be the methodology. i.e. maybe they are measuring this through the Nielson boxes hooked up to TVs if they've been changed to detect when a console is on. Thus portables and PC gaming couldn't be measured.

But who knows if that's how they do it since there's apparently nothing out their on their methodology.

My guess is this is survey or journal based. IIRC, Nielsen uses three measures to gather TV ratings - the boxes is one (but they don't account for folks who leave their sets on and don't actively watch, like myself), and viewership journals is another. I can't remember the third - phone surveys? Beats me.

[dmaul1114]

I'm sure this isn't it, but an interesting metric would be % of time the TV was on used for different things--TV, 360, PS3, DVD player etc. Doubt the technology is there to measure those yet, but it would be interesting to see how the average person was using the TV.

TV watching would be on top for me, with DVD/Blu Ray and 360 flip flopping for 2nd from week to week.

My guess is this is survey or journal based. IIRC, Nielsen uses three measures to gather TV ratings - the boxes is one (but they don't account for folks who leave their sets on and don't actively watch, like myself), and viewership journals is another. I can't remember the third - phone surveys? Beats me.

Yeah, I'm better about not leaving the TV on when not watching as I don't want to waste hours on the bulb since getting and LCD RPTV, but still there's a lot of days like today where I have it on while doing work on the couch on my laptop and only kind of watching something (football in today's case).

[Quillion]

Please please please (and thank you)!

At the very least, it will help make sense of the % of time used metric. As others point out, it's a strange measure since we aren't given an understanding of how to interpret it. Owning all 3 consoles (5 if you count my boxed up Xbox and PS2), I have the *opportunity* to divide my time between the consoles. Were I to only own, say, a Wii, it would be 100% of my gaming time, whether a minute a week or 30 hours.

And maybe I can see if they're hiring, since the academic market is ten kinds of fucked. ;)
Heh, we were just informed of a company-wide hiring freeze. We're still recruiting some, and really aren't that hard hit by the economy, so we don't expect layoffs, but no hires for the next six months at least.

[Bloodbooger]

It's all relative, they're measuring console usage. If I'm using my 360 to watch DVDs, or play OG xbox games, I'm still using my 360.

Hell, if my 360 is overheating and I want to cook some eggs on the beast, then I'm still using my 360.

If anything, Wii's lack of being a DVD player should hurt it's placement, and playing a Gamecube title only hurts the Gamecube's usage.

[Chase]

Hey, I'll dig up what I can when I can. I just wanted to say that I will bring more information.


I was being genuine. ;)

If you are able to do so, I look forward to what ever information you may share with us. :mrgreen:

[Sarang01]

The boxes detect watermarks in the signal sent to the TV, so that they can properly account for time-shifted viewing. It is conceivable that games could be watermarked as well, however it's unlikely.

This data is probably coming from our panel services. We have 125,000 households in the US who track purchases at all retailers, and they track other behaviors as well. Those households are selected at random, from specific needs in our sample (lacking this-or that particular demographic) and aren't allowed to serve for more than two years. Also, any data they provide is factored and considered against the other data sources to ensure accuracy.

Interesting. I heard about the boxes but thought I remembered hearing that they were ditched. Why? Because the ratings numbers weren't to the tv companies likings. In other words, the ratings weren't high enough so they could get the desired rate from advertisers.
Any word on when the head will be pulled out of the ass and we'll get 25 minute shows on a 30 minute show and 50 minutes per hour show instead of this quarter hour of advertising nonsense?
Next thing you know half hour shows will only be 15 minutes with the other 15 being ad's. Same with hour shows.

[mtxbass1]

Any word on when the head will be pulled out of the ass and we'll get 25 minute shows on a 30 minute show and 50 minutes per hour show instead of this quarter hour of advertising nonsense?
Next thing you know half hour shows will only be 15 minutes with the other 15 being ad's. Same with hour shows.

Have you watched any of the Viacom channels lately? MTV, Comedy Central, etc? They've cut what used to be 22 minute shows down to 19-20 minutes. It wouldn't suprise me at all if, in a few years, shows were cut to 15 minutes.

[gindias]

I'm curious as to what you mean be Nielsen being "wrong." Regardless of whether or not you agree with them, you don't get to be the largest media research group in the world without doing something right. Take TV for an example - their data is used to make decisions on which shows survive or are canceled, with millions of dollars hanging in the balance. If Nielsen was consistently wrong, don't you think another polling group would have sprung up by now to take their place?

No poll is ever perfect. I'm not saying that they're right, mind you (and won't until I can find information on their methodology for this data set), but saying they're wrong because they don't match your personal usage habits is a pretty bold assertion. I'd put more faith in Nielsen than in...say, posts like this:

My house was participating in these ratings years ago this was in the early 80's, this was mostly an honor system then. Meaning that you had to log what and when you watched a show and mail it in. I am sure they still do this today to a certain extent and anytime you have human input there is room for error.

I also know a person that participated about 2 years ago and he would log in and could could count for several people if he had "viewers" at his house. So if each person counts as 20k people imagine what one fan boy with 5 or six votes could do? As someone else pointed out they really dont cover all demographics well at all, considering they would pay us about $5 a month for our input I am sure most people dont take it to seriously.

[QiG]

Interesting. I heard about the boxes but thought I remembered hearing that they were ditched. Why? Because the ratings numbers weren't to the tv companies likings. In other words, the ratings weren't high enough so they could get the desired rate from advertisers.
Any word on when the head will be pulled out of the ass and we'll get 25 minute shows on a 30 minute show and 50 minutes per hour show instead of this quarter hour of advertising nonsense?
Next thing you know half hour shows will only be 15 minutes with the other 15 being ad's. Same with hour shows.

Fat chance of this. In general, I believe, that we as consumers don't react negatively enough to the level of advertising crammed in our faces constantly. I send out disgruntled emails/letters to brands I enjoy when I notice an exteme level of pop-ins, a press release regarding future advertising plans, ect... but I'm sure they're chuckled at and tossed aside. Nothing was worse than the Bill Engvall campaign on TBS leading up to the second season. We actually enjoyed that show, but I refused to watch it since the advertising invaded my TV screen once every 5 minutes as it was... it was as if I was already watching it anyway.

[strongpimphand]

seem plausable to me....

at work people talk about games and its either ps2 or 360. when it comes to the ps3....eh...

and when it comes to the wii....that's for the bitches

it's just the way it is. ps2 is great graphics wise and good for regular tvs (everyone doesn't have high def!) and 360 is good for that online play.

[odintal]

My house was participating in these ratings years ago this was in the early 80's, this was mostly an honor system then. Meaning that you had to log what and when you watched a show and mail it in. I am sure they still do this today to a certain extent and anytime you have human input there is room for error.

I also know a person that participated about 2 years ago and he would log in and could could count for several people if he had "viewers" at his house. So if each person counts as 20k people imagine what one fan boy with 5 or six votes could do? As someone else pointed out they really dont cover all demographics well at all, considering they would pay us about $5 a month for our input I am sure most people dont take it to seriously.

doubt the fanboy thing works. we'd still be watching new episodes of firefly and alias if it did.

[dmaul1114]

Fat chance of this. In general, I believe, that we as consumers don't react negatively enough to the level of advertising crammed in our faces constantly. I send out disgruntled emails/letters to brands I enjoy when I notice an exteme level of pop-ins, a press release regarding future advertising plans, ect... but I'm sure they're chuckled at and tossed aside. Nothing was worse than the Bill Engvall campaign on TBS leading up to the second season. We actually enjoyed that show, but I refused to watch it since the advertising invaded my TV screen once every 5 minutes as it was... it was as if I was already watching it anyway.

It's annoying, but there's not much of a way to complain, beyond writing/e-mailing, and that doesn't outweight the advertising money.

Stopping watching does nothing unless you're a Nielsen household.

Best we can do is put up with it, or watch on DVR and skip commercials or just wait to buy or rent the DVDs.

I used to have a Tivo when I had DirecTV a few years ago, it sucked moving and only having Comcast as their DVR was too expensive and pretty crappy compared to the Tivo so it took a while to readjust to commercials. Now I just don't watch a lot live and just keep the laptop around and check e-mail etc. during commercials.

[Sarang01]

My concern QiG is how you have a cohesive show getting down to 15 minutes. With John Stewart all that is is the opening jokes and such and ONE interview period. Wait n/m. He usually only has one guest to begin with I think. Well the guests bit might get cut quite a bit.
But with comedy's it's no content at all comparatively.

[Chase]

doubt the fanboy thing works. we'd still be watching new episodes of firefly and alias if it did.


Firefly... :-(

[Thomas96]

How does Nielsen actually measure console usage? I pretty sure they aren't relying on self report.

[mykevermin]

I'm still really confused on the metric, and it seems to me that it's going to be weighted based on sales. The usage minutes percentage, it appears, seems to be a metric measuring, say, the share of time used by each console relative to each other.

Which is inherently weighted in favor of consoles people actually own.

Which means it's misleading and the selection is biased based on the dependent variable (indirectly).

I like the fact that Nielsen is considering this, but I also think that they should either (1) explain, far better, their research numbers and methodology, or (2) go back to the drawing board and search for a better way of understanding/presenting these data.

[Quillion]

How does Nielsen actually measure console usage? I pretty sure they aren't relying on self report.
Again, I honestly don't know how we arrive at this particular metric.

But I will say that a great deal of information is arrived on by self-report. Besides the box program for TV ratings that takes a pretty thorough sample, we send out nearly five times that many "Viewership Journals", where people simply indicate what they watched and how long and mail it back in. We check this data against the automated data to weed out outliers and erroneous information.

The same thing with our Consumer Panel, where we have 125,000 families reporting what they buy, for what price, from where. That data is cross referenced against scanning data that is sent automatically from nearly every retail store.

Nearly every piece of information we collect and collate is verified against something else to ensure accuracy. After all, all our company sells is information. It has to be good, because if it weren't we'd go out of business pretty quickly.

[Quillion]

I'm still really confused on the metric, and it seems to me that it's going to be weighted based on sales. The usage minutes percentage, it appears, seems to be a metric measuring, say, the share of time used by each console relative to each other.

Which is inherently weighted in favor of consoles people actually own.

Which means it's misleading and the selection is biased based on the dependent variable (indirectly).

I like the fact that Nielsen is considering this, but I also think that they should either (1) explain, far better, their research numbers and methodology, or (2) go back to the drawing board and search for a better way of understanding/presenting these data.
We do supply that stuff to our clients, the briefs that we release to the media are kind of a "hey, we're tracking this now too". But you've raised a valid point in that no report was made of console ownership. Though to some degree I think that's moot. Does it matter to a company deciding which console to develop for whether or not you own a wii, for example, if it's only collecting dust and you're playing that 360?

Buying decisions by consumers are made either by "I only have a 360", or "I mostly play that 360".

[dmaul1114]

That's a fair point. Install base doesn't matter nearly as much as things like attach rate.

Developers don't care if more people own a console if they're not gamers who bought it for Wii Sports and Wii Fit and will never buy anything else.

[lowgear26]

Why is the PS2 so high? Thats easy. People on CAG are all gamers and most have already moved to the next Gen. Most other people are lower income, Moms, cheapskates....etc. The PS2 is cost effective and has a ton of games so it appeals to many more people that the Next Gen systems.

As for everyone that is up in arms over how they came to these numbers.......Neilson does not make shit up as they obviously have to maintain their credibility to function. I am sure that these are fairly accurate and can be trusted. I would like to know how they did this ratings system as well, but I trust it.

If anyone gets angry over this or feels like tearing this apart.....please look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself if it is worth the emotional drama.

[mykevermin]

We do supply that stuff to our clients, the briefs that we release to the media are kind of a "hey, we're tracking this now too". But you've raised a valid point in that no report was made of console ownership. Though to some degree I think that's moot. Does it matter to a company deciding which console to develop for whether or not you own a wii, for example, if it's only collecting dust and you're playing that 360?

Buying decisions by consumers are made either by "I only have a 360", or "I mostly play that 360".

I'm more or less just data hungry, y'know. The all-too-brief summary is an indicator that this is a tricky thing to measure, and not something that can be summarized as succinctly as tv ratings info is.

And I don't see how this becomes useful information for developers. With TV, ratings are currency, as it sets the standards for ad rates. With consoles, penetration is very important, and previous sales numbers are important - but is "time used" important for me, the hypothetical developer? I'd think sales numbers matter to me. If I'm interested in the bottom line, I don't care if you shove the software up your ass, eat it with a bowl of honey nut cheerios, or put a trillion hours into it - I've made the same $30-60 no matter the case. Perhaps, once these data are better prepared, refined, and made more accessible and/or intuitive (I've more faith in the former than the latter, but that's just the nature of what you're trying to measure), time usage can be an important way of determining if a company should go ahead with DLC development. But, for now, the data don't seem to bear out that kind of information.

EDIT: Right, lowgear. Only poor people, women, and 'cheapskates' play PS2 games. Christ; were you employed by Sony Japan 2.5 years ago?

[lowgear26]

I'm more or less just data hungry, y'know. The all-too-brief summary is an indicator that this is a tricky thing to measure, and not something that can be summarized as succinctly as tv ratings info is.

And I don't see how this becomes useful information for developers. With TV, ratings are currency, as it sets the standards for ad rates. With consoles, penetration is very important, and previous sales numbers are important - but is "time used" important for me, the hypothetical developer? I'd think sales numbers matter to me. If I'm interested in the bottom line, I don't care if you shove the software up your ass, eat it with a bowl of honey nut cheerios, or put a trillion hours into it - I've made the same $30-60 no matter the case. Perhaps, once these data are better prepared, refined, and made more accessible and/or intuitive (I've more faith in the former than the latter, but that's just the nature of what you're trying to measure), time usage can be an important way of determining if a company should go ahead with DLC development. But, for now, the data don't seem to bear out that kind of information.

EDIT: Right, lowgear. Only poor people, women, and 'cheapskates' play PS2 games. Christ; were you employed by Sony Japan 2.5 years ago?

Thats not what I meant Fuckhead.........More people with less money for gaming.........less caring people of what Gen they are in will get PS2's. I am talking about the "average" gamer that is in this country........does everyone have the ability to knock off money on Video games and syetems every year?

People still use VCR's because they dont feel the need to change and people still drive that 1990 Ford Tempo because it still runs. While it sounds insensitive, people with less money do get PS2's and use them......and Women generally that are into gaming purchases, buy for their kids.

It may come across harsh but I'm sure it contributes to these figures a bit.

[eddieismail]

Why the hell are people still buying Wii. I cannot fathom it, it like the iPod craze, but more useless

[jkanownik]

I'm more or less just data hungry, y'know. The all-too-brief summary is an indicator that this is a tricky thing to measure, and not something that can be summarized as succinctly as tv ratings info is.

And I don't see how this becomes useful information for developers. With TV, ratings are currency, as it sets the standards for ad rates. With consoles, penetration is very important, and previous sales numbers are important - but is "time used" important for me, the hypothetical developer? I'd think sales numbers matter to me. If I'm interested in the bottom line, I don't care if you shove the software up your ass, eat it with a bowl of honey nut cheerios, or put a trillion hours into it - I've made the same $30-60 no matter the case. Perhaps, once these data are better prepared, refined, and made more accessible and/or intuitive (I've more faith in the former than the latter, but that's just the nature of what you're trying to measure), time usage can be an important way of determining if a company should go ahead with DLC development. But, for now, the data don't seem to bear out that kind of information.

EDIT: Right, lowgear. Only poor people, women, and 'cheapskates' play PS2 games. Christ; were you employed by Sony Japan 2.5 years ago?

You're looking at it the wrong way. This is advertising driven. Developers don't care. It is targeted only at publishers and console manufacturers in the industry and then advertisers outside of the video game industry.

I'd bet that these numbers are based on the total minutes of all survey owners per console divided by the total minutes of all consoles. The reason they can't just come out and say that is that there is probably an extra step where they adjust the numbers to align with other data points (like total video game time from other surveys).

That said they're probably more statistically valid than NPD numbers. Given that NPD numbers are pretty close to actual sales, I'm fairly confident that these numbers are at the very least directionally correct.

[rickonker]

I was going to post this if it hadn't already been posted. 360 beats Wii! Original Xbox beats PS3!