wohufana said:
I would not have told you that those studies were conducted in 2017 if I didn't take a look at those links. By the way your first table indicates the ONLY 17% from 18 years old and below bracket who owned Switch while your second table reflects that nobody among gamers below 18 owned Switch. This reinforces my arguments that after 2017, Pokemon and other "kiddie" games attracted many younger gamers who finds no time for debates on social media. If these "younger" audience are ALL active in SocMed for console debates, don't you think Switch can't go toe-to-toe with XBox and PS in terms of engagements? |
What is SocMed? Social Medicine? We are discussing your first assertion, "A large portion of Switch owners are below 18 years old and they just want to play games."
The first graph clearly shows how things stood at 2017 in the US:
- 10% 15 and under;
- 7% in the 16-18 bracket;
- 20% in the 19-24 bracket;
- 43% majority in 25-34 bracket;
- 20% for the 35+.
The second graphic only shows from 18 years old onward, so you can take the subsection of adult gamers from the first graph. Even then the change between Q2 2017 to Q4 2018 shows an increase in the 18-24 and 35-44 ranges, the demographics then increased relatively more in between these ages.
A demographic already existed in 2017 with an 83% for the 19+ gamers, you cannot wipe these off when your so defined "kiddie" games release to go inline with your assumptions. The first graph I posted was the US demographics for 2020 for all gamers, and it also has a similar figure of 21% for the kiddos. Sorry to break your assumption that a large portion of Switch owners are under 18 when it is only around 20% which similar to the overall gaming landscape.
You should have said instead that, "A large portion of Switch owners are 30+ years old that don't care about social media."
