AfterDawn: News

Gamers spend most gaming time online via Xbox 360

According to a new NPD report, gamers spend the most time online via the Xbox 360 compared to rival consoles, averaging 7.3 hours per week.

PC gamers came in second at 6.6 hours per week, and the PS3 came third at 5.8 hours per week.



Overall, hours spent weekly on online games has increased 10 percent year-on-year, from 7.3 hours in 2008 to 8 hours in 2009.

Additionally, 20 percent of all games bought by online gamers were digital downloads, up from 19 percent in 2008.

Adds NPD Group industry analyst Anita Frazier: "The installed base of video game systems continues to grow, the platforms available to play games continue to expand and the options for content acquisition have never been greater, especially online. And yet, effective monetization of many forms of online gaming continues to be a topic of much debate and discussion within the industry."

The data was collected from 18,872 online gamers.

Written by: Andre Yoskowitz @ 3 Mar 2010 16:33

• Previous article

• Hulu loses Daily Show, Colbert Report

• Next article

• Apple to expand iBookstore globally

• 16 comments

• JorDogg

  I suppose when you pay for it you really try to make the most of it.

  3.3.2010 18:30 #1

• scorch2

  This is true, JorDogg!

  3.3.2010 18:37 #2

• KillerBug

  Very true.
  
  Also, PS3 has numerous exclusives that are offline-only, or have very limited online play, and GT5 is still delayed, while forza has been available for a while.

  3.3.2010 22:56 #3

• Morreale

  Play Demon's Souls, it's all offline and online at the same time :)

  3.3.2010 23:28 #4

• lawndog

  well I guess I'll be the first to say it. GOOD FOR THE 360. Personally I don't own 1. I have though but decided I wanted a PS3 instead. But either way. Instead of taking cheap shots at the fact that you have to pay for it I just wanna say good job. It's obvious that players would much rather play their "online games" via the 360.
  So please people quit whinning. You got your system, they got theres. Each have pros and cons.

  4.3.2010 04:06 #5

• dozerking

  I find it hard to believe the PC isn't at the top by a far margin. If you count casual games, which are no different than XBL games, I don't even think there's a comparison. Add MMO's to that, and I think they need a much larger sample size. If you look at MMO's alone, there are more people playing that Genre than there are XBL Gold Subscriptions worldwide. Even if it's North America only, MMO players alone probably take the cake as a sub group versus everyone else. Taking a sample of 16,000? There's more online on one WoW server at any given time...
  
  With XBL, like some have said, if you pay for it, you are certainly going to use it more. I've got XBL Gold, and my wife is always online playing Puzzle Quest and UNO etc..

  4.3.2010 05:53 #6

• KSib

  I understand what you're saying Dozer, but I think that for every super-hardcore WoW player, there's like 5 or more casual flash gamers and the sample probably represents that. I can't verify if the sampling was statistically correct or not because I'm not that knowledgeable of statistics.

  4.3.2010 06:27 #7

• Se7ven

  Its real simple people that have the 360 use the hell out of it as they should they paid for it,and it look like people are taking shots at the 360 no matter what people say the 360 is doing something right to have ssuch a base even with the RROD.People still play the 360 people are gonna still buy the 360 and 360 games i know to some it dont make sense that people will buy the inferior 360 but hey it play games and to some thats all that matter.

  4.3.2010 07:07 #8

• Gnawnivek

  The numbers are so close anyway, 7.3/6.6/5.8... but yeah, i expect to see much higher number for the Xbox 360 since MS charge a premium for Live (richer experience as most gamers call it).

  4.3.2010 10:15 #9

• emugamer

  So of those 18,872 gamers, I am assuming that the same number of 360 owners were polled as PS3 owners, as PC owners. Not for nothing, but this, like all other surveys are garbage. Not getting down on the 360. I just think these surveys are a waste of time, unless they can provide us with the distribution. They are nothing but fan-boy fodder (generally speaking - I'm not implying that anyone who posted here is a fan-boy).

  4.3.2010 12:59 #10

• Oner

  Originally posted by Gnawnivek: The numbers are so close anyway, 7.3/6.6/5.8... but yeah, i expect to see much higher number for the Xbox 360 since MS charge a premium for Live (richer experience as most gamers call it).Exactly.
  
  
  Originally posted by emugamer: So of those 18,872 gamers, I am assuming that the same number of 360 owners were polled as PS3 owners, as PC owners. Not for nothing, but this, like all other surveys are garbage. Not getting down on the 360. I just think these surveys are a waste of time, unless they can provide us with the distribution. They are nothing but fan-boy fodder (generally speaking - I'm not implying that anyone who posted here is a fan-boy).Which is why this poll is quite irrelevant. Plus the fact it's only for NPD, thus just for the US not a World Wide view.
  

  
  
  Search > http://forums.afterdawn.com/search
  Rules > http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
  Important Rule > http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/380660

  4.3.2010 13:49 #11

• KillerBug

  Originally posted by Se7ven: Its real simple people that have the 360 use the hell out of it as they should they paid for it,and it look like people are taking shots at the 360 no matter what people say the 360 is doing something right to have ssuch a base even with the RROD.People still play the 360 people are gonna still buy the 360 and 360 games i know to some it dont make sense that people will buy the inferior 360 but hey it play games and to some thats all that matter.The study did not measure how much play time there was, just how much time playing online multiplayer games. This means that every single-player game (incuding the single-player part of multiplayer games) is ignored. I think if they counted all the single-player games, then the PC average would be much lower, as many people play such games for less than an hour a week, and play no other games.

  5.3.2010 01:06 #12

• lxhotboy

  I hate hat you have to pay for xbox Live honestly. I'm not going to try put a plus on Microsoft side in that regards, but I don't think more people play online bc you have to pay for it. Sounds like an reality excuse to me. Most people don't say "well I better watch more tv on these paid for channels on tv than on the free channels." They just watch what appeals to them more at a particular time. Reality is it just a better gaming experience and that does come into effect bc they have more money to focus on their online developments. Let's keep it real folks.

  9.3.2010 09:42 #13

• pspweazl

  I wonder if this will change a bit with the release of MAG, it seems more and more people are playing it, and with microsoft shutting down the older Halo online servers in April I think it may change a bit. IMHO.

  9.3.2010 20:46 #14

• sporty8

  xbox live is why

  9.3.2010 21:07 #15

• Get Real (unverified)

  @Se7ven I am always amused whenever someone says the Xbox 360 is inferior to the Playstation three. All you guys do is listen to Sony telling you how amazing their processor system is. Did you know that the processing power of the PS3 was only slightly higher than the 360 but they scaled it back to match the 360's because the system was running too hot? Or that the real reason the PS3 does not beat the 360 in screenshot comparisons isn't because of developers not understanding how to get the most out of the PS3 processor system. Did you even see the latest Final Fantasy footage that everyone swore was PS3 footage until the Xbox 360 logo came up at the end. The PS3's processor system is built to excel at graphics but in order to run the huge and resource intensive games of this current generation it has to take away from the graphics processing. It will never be able to devote enough processing power to give the amazing visuals Sony promised. The 360 is a more robust system all around. Microsoft did a good job of making the baseline specs of the system stronger than the PS3's. Strong base for handling enormous amounts of in game computations and environment rendering plus good visual processing power equals good visuals. Weaker baseline specs or the same for a few elements, plus excellent visual processing power equals good visuals. Which is why huge games like Fallout 3 play better on the 360 (with better draw distances) because it is using the resources that are meant to be used. To run the game well the PS3 is using resources that were supposed to be entirely devoted to graphics. Due to their architecture Sony has made a system that is about the same as the 360 but does it in a different way. Slight edge in visuals go to PS3 thanks to the boost given by blueray and yet the 360 comes out better or the safe in most comparisons. Rarely are the visuals graded less. Different, yes. Inferior, hardly. Unless you talk about hardware components that fail. I will give you that. Turns out 360 owners play their system alot more in one sitting than anyone could have ever imagined. The Xbox franchise has always had a following of hardcore gamers. Remember. Xbox was selling great games comparable to PS2 sells without having half the install base. Xbox magazine outsold playstation magazine while having a smaller install base. Gamers do not play Xbox Live so much because they pay for it. Gamers pay for Xbox live because they know before hand that they will use it all the time. If you knew before hand that you would be online merking people most of your waking life then 30 something dollars for an online service would be nothing. Because you know you were going to get more than your money's worth.

  17.3.2010 13:44 #16