Why core gamers hate social gamers: Is it all about the money?


Isn't it always about the Benji's? GamesBrief seems to think so in its short and sweet estimation of why exactly core gamers--i.e. those who wouldn't dare put the controller down for FarmVille--hate social gamers. First of all, the post draws a line between what a core and a casual audience is, while doing the same for core and casual gamers.

According to GamesBrief, 90 percent of "core gamers" don't even finish the games they buy, which cost $40 on average, while the dedicated 10 percent reaps the benefits. How, do you say? "In the core games market, the casual or non-dedicated player subsidizes the gaming enjoyment of the core gamer," GamesBrief says. In other words, traditional games would be nothing without the majority that wastes money on games they'll never finish, thus funding future releases for dedicated fans to play.

However, because social games are free to play, 90 percent of players will never pay to play though virtual goods purchases. This is because they don't have to--the remaining 10 percent that is willing to pay is what keeps companies like Zynga afloat. In short, it's the paying minority that allows social games to support casual audiences who will never pay a dime. So, what does this leave us with?