Nielsen Tells Us Who Buys Movie Games

Since no one here will admit to buying video game movies - so few rise above the category's shovelware reputation - Nielsen done some research on the demographics most likely to buy titles like Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel.

Sooprise, sooprise, "households with kids ages 6-12 represent the 'sweet spot' for these products," writes Nielsen on its blog. Also, these households tend to be wealthier, with incomes above $US70,000. But lest you think this is strictly a suburban whitebread consumer template, Hispanics and Asians were most likely, among ethnicities, to pick up this type of game, too.

What is interesting to me is the console breakdown of video game movie buyers. The PlayStation 3 is the clear leader, followed by the PlayStation 2 and Xbox 360. The Wii? A distant fourth.

This is probably attributable to the first three consoles outnumbering the Wii for development of video game adaptations. But as Nielsen started this by painting the picture of a comfortable, dual-income family with kids younger than 12 in the house, and with most major film adaptations going to all consoles, the Wii turning up so low is kind of a surprise.

Movie-based Video Games and the Households that Buy Them [Nielsen Blog]


Comments

    Why can't they ever get a game from a movie to be any good? The only exception being goldeneye and that was a heck of a while ago. C'mon developers, give us something good and we may buy it. We adults aren't as easily fooled and we know when something is good or not, just from reading opinions on it.

      Why can’t they ever get a game from a movie to be any good?

      I'll tell you exactly why, because in most cases the film titles are rushed, with low budgets and very little vision. The developers are often hampered by the film makers not giving them a clear guide as to what they can and can't do. (like change the story, develop on the world setting etc.)

      The exceptions are thos rare few film titles where the film makers embrace the game idea and get involved int he process. Unfortunately too many film studio see a game tie in in exactly the same way as a film related happy meal, its just a spin off to generate cash, so sadly they don't care about it.

      How do I know all this?
      I have worked on over 2 dozen film franchise games in the last ten years....and yes I do feel slightly unclean. ;-)

        It's important to note that GoldenEye was released almost 2 years after the movie, unlike most movie games that fail.

    Well look at a movie game recently that had excellent access to the film creator and resources, Avatar. Wait that still blew, so whats the problem?

    Transmedia storytelling falls into the trap of attempting to bring products out 'when its all fresh' when its all together, which is utterly creatively bankrupt. Marketers should never have the say on when a creative product is finished.

    Look at escape from butcher bay for an example, thats a movie game done right, came out pretty much independantly from memory, the (shitty) film came out a year or so earlier.

    But then look at path of neo, that was terribad and was released well after the matrix movies... so I don't know, there's no answer, just don't get shit people to make games... I guess.

    Must say though, they have done a pretty spectacular job with James Cameron's Avatar. Not the best game on the market of course, but for a movie game, its amazing!

    I was looking forward to Terminator Salvation the game. Can you imagine how good that would have been with some real effort involved?!

    Haha, Jumper. I was actually one of the people who worked on that game, and yes, I'm not proud. But to answer the question of why we don't get good licensed titles, well with Jumper we had 4 months and a team of only about 15 people to make the entire game. It was a huge challenge even getting ANYTHING out the door under those conditions, let alone something of top shelf quality.

    Then you also have to realise, on these licensed titles, the developer rarely has full control over the project, often times game design decisions will be forced upon you by the publishers, and you really don't have a choice but to make the game they want you to make, after all, its their money thats paying for it.

    Hey what about Riddick Dark Athena, Ghostbusters, Thw Warriors?

    This makes sense as these kids aren't real games to know what makes a game great.

    They simply identify with the character which has bombarded their TV, and decide well I want the game too.

    As long as this continues we will have crappy movie adaptations such as the recent Avatar.

    Pretty much with the exception of goldeneye, all movie games IO have played that were any good simply used the IP of the movie/book/whatever and created a game based around the universe and characters.

Join the discussion!