4.6 Article

Typology and Sociodemographic Characteristics of Massively Multiplayer Online Game Players

Journal

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10447318.2012.702636

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Hungarian Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor [KAB-KT-09-0007]
  2. Hungarian Scientific Research Fund [83884]
  3. Janos Bolyai Research Fellowship
  4. Hungarian Academy of Science

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To date, there has been relatively little research comparing different types of online gamers. The main aim of this study was to provide robust benchmark data on different types of Massively Multiplayer Online Game (MMOG) players using a large sample of online gamers. An online survey was used to recruit 4,374 Hungarian online gamers from websites offering different types of MMOGs. In addition to sociodemographic characteristics, the study also collected data on gaming preference, amount of time spent gaming, amount of money spent on the game, and whether they played at an amateur or professional level. A latent profile analysis of gaming preferences differentiated between eight specific gamer types, of which four types emerged as clear categories, indicating clear preference for a specific type of game (role-playing games, first-person shooter games, real-time strategy games, and other games). Overall, 79% of gamers belonged to these four categories. First-person shooter gamers were almost exclusively male, younger aged, lower educated, and of lower socioeconomic status. Real-time strategy gamers were older. Female gamers were most likely to play Other games and/or role-playing games. In relation to time spent gaming, role-playing gamers appeared to be the most vulnerable. The results indicated that a significant number of gamers have clear gaming preferences, and these specific gaming types are associated with significant differences regarding sociodemographic and gaming characteristics of gamers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available