Here’s a sentence you’ve probably seen in a number of recent Knight Center of Digital Excellence articles: “AT&T has publicly stated that real-time gaming is an ‘aspirational service’ and not a core broadband application.”
The statement has been used multiple times as an example the growing debate between service providers and other industries since Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Julius Genachowski’s Sept. 21 net neutrality webcast at the Brookings Institution.
Let’s take a closer look at AT&T’s statement, though. Should real-time gaming be considered an “aspirational service” and not a core broadband application? After all, video games are more or less for kids, right?
Not quite. Growing survey data presented in a 2008 Harvard Business School study on video games and broadband revealed the traditional gamer stereotype of the teenage boy is outdated. Consider these recent Entertainment Software Association numbers:
- The average gamer is 35 years old and has been playing for 12 years.
- Forty percent of all gamers are women. Additionally, “women over 18 years of age” is one of the industry’s fastest growing demographics. Adult women represent a greater portion of the game-playing population (34 percent) than boys age 17 or younger (18 percent). In addition, 57 percent of online gamers are male and 43 percent are female.
- Twenty-five percent of gamers are over the age of 50, an increase from 9 percent in 1999. This figure is expected to rise in coming years with nursing homes and senior centers across the nation now incorporating video games into their activities.
- Forty-two percent of homes in America have a video game console.
- Thirty-seven percent of heads of households report they play games on wireless devices such as a cell phone or PDA, up from 20 percent in 2002.
The statistics regarding wireless devices are particularly interesting because the FCC is still considering how issues such as net neutrality will affect wireless Internet. Regardless of what the FCC is thinking now, numbers seem to indicate devices that have a strong gaming component are likely to gain the attention of consumers.
The Harvard Business School study demonstrated that innovative devices, ubiquitous broadband access, improved games and increased reach led to U.S. sales of software, hardware and accessories reaching $18.9 billion in 2007, an almost 40 percent growth over 2006 sales. The Nintendo DS, a handheld broadband gaming device, was the top-selling gaming device in 2007 with 8.5 million units sold. Overall, more than 12 million handheld broadband video game devices were sold that year, in addition to 13 million console units that are capable of real-time online gaming.
The application side of online gaming claims a large audience as well. World of Warcraft, an extremely popular online role-playing video game, claimed 11.5 million monthly subscribers in August 2009. Facebook, the popular social media application with over 130 million subscribers, offers a number of “freemium” video games such as “Farmville” and “Mafia Wars” that not only attract millions of players, but also revolve around social networking. Gamesbrief (a video game industry blog) analyst Nicholas Lovell has claimed that many “freemium” games on Facebook make close to $20 per player on average, as players have the option to pay real money for virtual items that enhance play.
Non-video game device manufacturers are paying attention to these numbers. At a recent media gathering, Apple showed off updates to its line of iPods, pointing out there are more than 21,000 game available on the company’s App store for its iPhone and iPod Touch. In an interview with the New York Times, Apple CEO Steve Jobs said the company’s customers saw the iPod Touch as a strong gaming platform.
Major gaming device companies such as Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo have typically written off Apple as a major threat to their industry status. However, that hasn’t stopped those companies from moving in Apple’s arena as well. Both Sony’s PSP Go and Nintendo’s DSi are relatively new efforts by traditional handheld video game manufacturers to add more broadband-heavy functions to devices.
Could AT&T’s statement be pushback rhetoric from a service provider whose infrastructure can’t support gaming? Is AT&T trying to undermine not only competitors but also an entire platform of innovation that millions of Americans take advantage of on a daily basis?
Possibly. But the point is that while AT&T may want to classify real-time gaming as an “aspirational service,” it seems that device manufacturers, online application creators and American consumers are taking a more serious stance.
