Beyond the Sale: The Reason Gaming is Counting "Players" Now

Multiple publishers have quietly announced a shift in their preferred measurement metric, moving from the traditional "Copies Sold" to "Players." This change is primarily driven by the rise of subscription services, where gamers "rent" titles rather than purchasing them outright, reminiscent of the Blockbuster era.

One might assume a metric like "downloads" would suffice, but this would likely result in lower reported figures. "Players," I suspect, is a metric influenced by Nielsen, similar to how "Viewers" are tracked in sports viewership. This metric counts not just the individual playing or downloading, but also others present and watching.

The rationale behind counting "Players" extends to advertising. While traditional gamers are often averse to in-game advertisements, whether splash screens at boot-up or breaks between levels (common in free mobile games), the industry aims to normalize this across all game types.

Nielsen excels at measuring how many people are watching a game. While a mobile phone typically equates to one player, consoles, especially the Nintendo Switch, likely involve more viewers, particularly within younger demographics, potentially adding at least 0.5 additional viewers per player. This means businesses placing ads in games can now advertise not just to the player, but also to those watching.

Similar to how "viewers" are highlighted in the streaming world, stating "10 MILLION PLAYERS" is significantly more impactful than "550k Sold and a mess of people playing on Game Pass." While this measurement makes business sense, the ultimate consequence for gamers is an increase in advertising.

It's also crucial to note that this shift in metrics aligns with a desire to attract more casual, less demanding gamers who might be more accepting of these changes and increased advertising. However, this forced behavioral shift has not yet proven successful.