Interactive Australia 2007 Report released

PALGN News | The average Australian gamer is 28 years old.

Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia (IEAA) has released the Interactive Australia 2007 report, which look at trends amongst gaming. The research is taken from 1,606 households and 3,386 individuals and found that women and older gamers are the fastest growing audience for games.

Some key findings from the survey include:

79% of Australian households have a device for playing computer and video games.
The average age of Australian gamers is 28 years.
Interactive games are attracting new players. 41% of gamers are female. 8% are seniors.
Parents and children are increasingly playing together. 35% of gamers are parents.
61% of gamers play for up to an hour at one time.
Playing computer games does not compete with non-media and outdoor leisure activities. Instead it competes with other media such as TV, film and music.
Parents in game households say the positive aspects of game play are more than just enjoyment and happiness. 73% say games help their children learn about technology, 68% say games help their children learn maths, 64% say games help children learn to plan.
70% of games classified by the OFLC in 2006 were rated G or PG. 62% of Australians in game households say the classification of a game has no influence on their buying decision.
Australians are very confused about the difference between the M and MA15+ classification
Broadband penetration decreased steadily with age. Game households were 12% more likely than non-game households to have broadband.
Playing online games ranks 10th among the list of activities Australians identify as their common uses of the internet. Email, web browsing, banking and paying bills are the top uses

The full twenty page report can be found at the IEAA website.

Related Content

World Cyber Games final on this weekend
22 Aug, 2007 Something for everyone.

Discovering GO3
27 Nov, 2006 The must-see event of 2007.

SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs Fireteam Bravo Review
29 Apr, 2006 Bravo, Bravo, Encore, Encore.

Page12 Next

32 Comments

Crestfallen

5 years ago

They produce these accurate sounding facts such as "households with gamers are 12% more likely to have broadband" yet the sample size is only 1600

magrat

5 years ago

crestfallen12 wrote

They produce these accurate sounding facts such as "households with gamers are 12% more likely to have broadband" yet the sample size is only 1600

I guess unfortunately that's the nature of these sorts of surveys. At least it provides some data, and it generally paints a positive picture of gaming in Australia. Hopefully it will help push gaming foward as a mainstream entertainment medium.

I'm a bit suprised about the average age being 28, but I expect the median age is a lot lower than that. The parts about most people not understanding the classication system is interesting, although the way the question was presented looks a little tricky. Describing something as M vs MA15 is one thing, but if you showed the actual labels where the MA15 has "restricted" printed across the bottom it would probably be a lot clearer in it's meaning.

The other part about 62% of gamers paying no interest to the classifications is also a strange old statistic - perhaps a more useful one would be the number of parents buying games for their children who use the classifications. That would show I think a more accurate picture of the impact the classification has on the purchase decision.

admeister

5 years ago

article wrote

Australians are very confused about the difference between the M and MA15+ classification

What the hell is so confusing about that?

Karai Pantsu

5 years ago

I imagine it might leave people wondering what age upwards the standard Mature rating is for, if there is one. All the others are easy to understand off the bat:
G - everyone can play!
PG - everyone can play, with a parent!
M - ???
MA15+ - everyone 15 years of age and older can play!

Or something else entirely

renegadesx

5 years ago

Judging by these figures, I really do think the Wii will totally dominate, considering how big these audiences have become. The main demographic could very well become a minority if this keeps up.

renegadesx

5 years ago

The OLFC wont care, they will always treat video games as a 2nd class citizen to the important things like television shows and movies.

magrat

5 years ago

admeister wrote

What the hell is so confusing about that?

I didn't do the survey, but it appears the question would have been something like this:

Q. What does the M and MA classications mean:

A. M means it is for 15 years and MA is for 18 years and older
B. M means it is recommended for 15 and older, MA means it's illegal for anyone under 15
C. M means its illegal for anyone under 15, MA means it's recommended for 15 and older
D. I don't know the difference

If the question was comparing M and MA15+, it's hard to imagine how 32% of people would have answered A, given that 18 isn't mentioned anywhere in the question. The fact that they are asking about M vs MA looks a bit shonky to me, especially given there isn't an MA rating anymore. Having said that, 38% of people did get it right, and if you showed people the proper classification stickers I'm sure more people would have got it right.

Now that's not confusing at all.

James

5 years ago

crestfallen12 wrote

They produce these accurate sounding facts such as "households with gamers are 12% more likely to have broadband" yet the sample size is only 1600

The survey uses a sample audience by AC Neilsen that takes cross section of people designed to be representative of the Australian public. They cross reference the demographic results with ABS statistics.

Jellyfish

5 years ago

Quote

62% of Australians in game households say the classification of a game has no influence on their buying decision.

That doesn't surprise me one bit

You could almost put money on that the majority of people who play M/MA games are under 15.

renegadesx

5 years ago

magrat wrote

admeister wrote

What the hell is so confusing about that?

Now that's not confusing at all.

Yeah well i am sick of the OFLC's treatment towards this industry, I am starting a petition to overhaul (or replace if it comes to it) the OFLC for a more fair treatment

Nev

5 years ago

Karai Pantsu wrote

PG - Parental Guidance Recommended
M - ???
MA 15+ - Profit!

renegadesx wrote

Judging by these figures, I really do think the Wii will totally dominate, considering how big these audiences have become.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

Seriously though, that's what Nintendo is banking on, but it's by no means a sure thing. PCs (Sims, World of Warcraft, Second Life) and the PS2 (Singstar, Eye Toy, Buzz the Musical Quizz) have probably had the biggest influence on bringing female Australian gamers into the fold in recent years.

The Wii can certainly capitalize on these demographics, but it's really going to come down to the games. There are some great party games available, but I haven't yet seen anything that could compete with the runaway popularity (amongst female gamers) of titles like Singstar or Second Life.

Not that there's anything on the 360 or PS3 that could either, for that matter (though Viva Pinata looked promising).

As with all things, time will tell. [/quote]

Nev

5 years ago

Anyway, back on subject...

So when are we getting our damn R rating?

Never, obviously. But that doesn't mean we can't have a darn good whinge about it.

P.S. I only just realized. Is there some kind of poetic irony in the fact that this report that states the average gamer in Australia is 28 comes out just after my 28th birthday?

Wooo! I'm average!

renegadesx

5 years ago

Nev wrote

Wooo! I'm average!

The Govt are morons, they wont do it, they are convinced that young teens are the majoiriy of game players out there. I am starting a petition to get the OFLC to wake up to themselves (or even replaced) and I would like the help of everybody who agrees

http://www.petitiononline.com/augames/petition.html

ObsoletE

5 years ago

Nev wrote

Wooo! I'm average!

welcome to mediocrity.

renegadesx wrote

at the risk of taking this too far off-topic, i don't think they are morons.

the BEST way to convince the OFLC to introduce an R-Rating would be to assure them that retailers won't sell content that is inappropriate to minors to minors, and right now that isn't happening, both for games, and for movies.

fix the distribution issues, and then we can think about fixing the hole in the ratings, because aside from 1 or 2 pretty ambiguous "bannings" as a result in that they were deemed R-Ratings for fairly trivial (imo) issues (Getting Up, and Blitz), games that would otherwise get R-Ratings (Postal, Leisure Suit Larry) are definately not suited for minors, and without tighter retail law/enforcement, there's no way i personally would support bringing in an R-Rating.

(don't take this as "i don't want an R-Rating fullstop", i think we should have it, but not if it means that inappropriate content is getting to the wrong people.)

EDIT:
to comment on your addition of a petition, Online Petitions generally aren't worth the paper they're written on. if you truly want change, write to your government minister directly, it'll be much more effective.
(it is a well written open letter though, so don't be discouraged by my personal abstinance from signing, i'm not attacking your try, just your method.)

Nev

5 years ago

The problem is that I'd LIKE to think that with this generation growing up with video games and computers, that the leaders of tomorrow will be more enlightened.

Unfortunately, the case remains that the only people stuffy and BORING enough to want to become politicians in the first place are the ones who never had a day of fun in their lives, and the only joy they and their aging cronies seem to get is in taking away other people's meagre pleasures.

ObsoletE, you bring up a good point. Believe me, there's NOTHING worse than seeing an 8 year old playing a game like Grand Theft Auto. It's like seeing 12-year olds smoke.

In the same breath, though, I think the government and the media focus on the wrong games. I don't mind my 4-year-old son watching me play GTA (though I'll go easy on the "hooker-capping" when he's around, certainly, but I would never EVER let him see a game like Resident Evil or Silent Hill.

One time when he was a baby, my g/f had just gotten him up from a nap, and I had Resident Evil going. Dark hallway, sombre music.. no zombies in sight... And he just started crying.

They're powerful things, games. People shouldn't underestimate them.

But so are cars. It's just a matter of making sure that they're in the right hands (and a bang-up job we do, amirite?)

Jellyfish

5 years ago

ObsoletE wrote

if you truly want change, write to your government minister directly, it'll be much more effective.

Also make it seem as if this issue will get you and many other people to vote for him/her. If you can do that they'll definately bring it up in the house.

ObsoletE

5 years ago

Nev wrote

ObsoletE, you bring up a good point. Believe me, there's NOTHING worse than seeing an 8 year old playing a game like Grand Theft Auto. It's like seeing 12-year olds smoke.

In the same breath, though, I think the government and the media focus on the wrong games. I don't mind my 4-year-old son watching me play GTA (though I'll go easy on the "hooker-capping" when he's around, certainly, but I would never EVER let him see a game like Resident Evil or Silent Hill.

One time when he was a baby, my g/f had just gotten him up from a nap, and I had Resident Evil going. Dark hallway, sombre music.. no zombies in sight... And he just started crying.

They're powerful things, games. People shouldn't underestimate them.

But so are cars. It's just a matter of making sure that they're in the right hands (and a bang-up job we do, amirite?)

oh i think they do focus on the wrong games, but sometimes for the right reasons.

i have no issue with a parent knowingly giving a game to their child, but when the child is able to access the game without parental knowledge, or concern, then it's an issue.

sure, fixing retail issues won't stop all instances, as there will still be the irresponsible adult who buys "Hooker-napping 8" because their child wants it, but it'll prevent a decent amount of cases.

the example i've used before is seeing a girl who didn't even look to be in high-school buying Irreversible at JB Hifi without question. now maybe she was older, but if i was fooled, surely the cashier was too.

---
at least cars have a fairly enforcable age-limit though.

(no, this is not a call for people to get a Videogame Licence after passing an exam.)

Cult of Cthulhu

5 years ago

28 years old is average eh? well at last I'm above average in something!

Se7en

5 years ago

James wrote

crestfallen12 wrote

the sample size is only 1600

"The research is taken from 1,606 households and 3,386 individuals" so the validity of the survey was what drew my attention. Is it possible to simplify your explanation further James? Do you award this survey any merit?

Nev

5 years ago

ObsoletE wrote

i have no issue with a parent knowingly giving a game to their child, but when the child is able to access the game without parental knowledge, or concern, then it's an issue.

That, I think, is the biggest problem with the ratings system in Australia.

From comments made when Getting Up was banned, the OFLC and Australian politicians seem to be of the opinion that, regardless of a game's rating, games are for children, and somehow or other, a child will manage to get hold of X game. Therefore, no game can be released which contains material that is inappropriate for a child.

It reeks of hypocrisy, because they're basically saying that they don't mind children being irrevocably scarred for life by psychological horror games like Silent Hill (I know a guy who watched horror movies at a young age.. it ain't pretty), than know how to spray graffiti on walls.

Essentially, gamers of a mature age with even a modicum of intelligence and social conscience should be able to watch and play whatever type of movie and/or game we want, but this attitude prevents us from being able to do that.

I'm hoping that downloadable games (like the Xbox Live Marketplace and Playstation Store) will help solve this issue, by making it impossible to purchase these types of games without a credit card, and having parental locks so that children can't access the material.

Keeping these more "attention-grabbing" titles off store shelves might also prevent knee-jerk reactions from over-zealous types.

Like how porn has been delegated to the internet. For all the hoopla over video games and TV shows, it's amusing how few family groups complain about the fact that any child can be viewing images of a woman fellating a horse within 10 seconds.

ObsoletE

5 years ago

Se7en wrote

James wrote

crestfallen12 wrote

the sample size is only 1600

basically, what AC Nielsen do is look at the available census data and go, ok, Australia has 20,000,000 in it, of which:
48% are men
52% are women
40% are employed
30% are in fulltime education
12% are upper-class
42% are middle class
and so on, for many various demographics. (note: i made those numbers up for example purposes only, don't be quoting them as facts.)

AC Nielsen then do the survey on a scale format, so they seek the same percentages amongst their sample size, so within that 3300 people surveyed, 48% will be men, and so on, not just a Man though, they'll try get a Man, whose unemployed, but middle-class, and so on.

getting 1:1 ratios of samplees is usually impossible, so weighting might be introduced, where if you only manage to get 24% of the survey respondants being male, they'll double the relevance of their responses.

then every Man surveyed would represent XX people in the real world.

obviously it's not perfect, but it's essentially the best process available short of a national referendum.

also, it's obvious that the higher the sample volume, the more accurate it would be likely to be deemed. 3300 people is quite high from surveys i've seen. i've seen news articles use percentages as fact when the sample size has been barely over 100 people.

Nev wrote

that any child can be viewing images of a woman fellating a horse within 10 seconds.

dammit, i'm really missing out here.

takes me twice that, at least.

renegadesx

5 years ago

nikack wrote

ObsoletE wrote

if you truly want change, write to your government minister directly, it'll be much more effective.

Also make it seem as if this issue will get you and many other people to vote for him/her. If you can do that they'll definately bring it up in the house.

I appreciate the suggestions, and I defiantly will take you up on it. I just think they do not see it as an issue otherwise it would have happened already. I will try whatever could work, I am sick and tired of bitching about it and actually do something about it

EvilHayama

5 years ago

3300 is quite a lot of people for a survey. For details on why that's enough, you need maths

Quote

# 70% of games classified by the OFLC in 2006 were rated G or PG. 62% of Australians in game households say the classification of a game has no influence on their buying decision.

I hope the 62% doesn't include too many parents buying for kids!