PC Gaming Alliance: Big PC Gaming Growth in 2010

March 1, 2011 -

The PC Gaming Alliance published a preliminary part of its third annual Horizons research reports, revealing the state of the PC gaming industry in 2010. Prepared by research firm DFC Intelligence, the report covers 2010 and offers projections for the market worldwide through 2014. The full report will be shared with PCGA members a week after GDC - going on this week in San Francisco.

According to data from the report, the worldwide PC games market reached a record $16.2 billion in 2010 - a 20 percent jump from 2009.

China was the largest and fastest growing market in 2010, with record revenue of around $4.8 billion. Korea, Japan, the US, UK and Germany also all showed growth in 2010. Together these markets increased revenue by 19 percent in 2010 to $7.3 billion.

PCGA president and Intel analyst Matt Ployhar says the 2010 numbers show that the focus has returned to the PC.

"The spotlight has definitely shifted back to the PC game market. A few of the biggest factors fueling this movement are innovative business models making games more accessible with digital distribution, free to play, and online; along with game formats embracing the shifts occurring in the evolution of the PC ecosystem to remain more profitable," said Ployhar.

The report concluded that the PC game sector is expected to grow by 9 percent to $23 billion by 2014. Digital distribution is the likely catalyst for this growth.

Expect to hear more about this report after the conclusion of the Game Developers Conference at the end of the week.

Source: Develop


Comments

Re: PC Gaming Alliance: Big PC Gaming Growth in 2010

Woah, the PCGA just made their third announcement in 3 years. Shock of shocks they still exist. Not really doing anything of merit (two of their promoters AKa Capcom and Epic have abandoned PCs because it couldn't pull the numbers they wanted from their substandard ports while another two of their remaining ones AKA Sony DADC and DELL have done more damage for PC Gaming than they benefited) but apparently still there.

Here's the fun thing, each member has to put up 5K annually for contributer membership, or 30K annually for a promoter membership, yet this money seems to be going nowhere.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Is King right? Should all games adopt the free-to-play model?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MaskedPixelanteWell, I am officially done with Night Dive Studios. Unless they can bring something worthwhile back, I'm never buying another game from them.04/17/2014 - 2:29pm
PHX Corphttp://www.msnbc.com/ronan-farrow/watch/video-games-continue-to-break-the-mold-229561923638 Ronan Farrow Daily on Video games breaking the mold04/17/2014 - 2:13pm
NeenekoAh yes, because by building something nice they were just asking for people to come push them out. Consequences are protested all the time when other people are implementing them.04/17/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew Wilsonok than they should not protest when the consequences of that choice occur.04/17/2014 - 1:06pm
NeenekoIf people want tall buildings, plenty of other cities with them. Part of freedom and markets is communities deciding what they do and do not want built in their collective space.04/17/2014 - 12:55pm
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
Matthew WilsonSF have to build upwards they have natural growth limits. they can not grow outwards. ps growing outwards is terable just look at Orlando or Austin for that.04/16/2014 - 4:15pm
ZippyDSMleeIf they built upward then it would becoem like every other place making it worthless, if they don't build upward they will price people out making it worthless, what they need to do is a mix of things not just one exstreme or another.04/16/2014 - 4:00pm
Matthew Wilsonyou know the problem in SF was not the free market going wrong right? it was government distortion. by not allowing tall buildings to be build they limited supply. that is not free market.04/16/2014 - 3:48pm
ZippyDSMleeOh gaaa the free market is a lie as its currently leading them to no one living there becuse they can not afford it makign it worthless.04/16/2014 - 3:24pm
Matthew WilsonIf you have not read http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/introducing-steam-gauge-ars-reveals-steams-most-popular-games/ you should. It is a bit stats heavy, but worth the read.04/16/2014 - 2:04pm
Matthew Wilsonthe issue is when is doesn't work it can screw over millions in new york city's case. more often than not it is better to let the free market run its course without market distortion.04/16/2014 - 9:36am
NeenekoTrue, and overdone stagnation is a problem. It is a tricky balance. It does not help that when it does work, no one notices. Most people here have benifited from rent controls and not even realized it.04/16/2014 - 9:23am
ZippyDSMleehttp://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2014/04/15/riaa_files_civil_suit_against_megaupload04/16/2014 - 8:48am
ZippyDSMleeEither way you get stagnation as people can not afford the prices they set.04/16/2014 - 8:47am
Neenekowell, specifically it helps people already living there and hurts people who want to live there instead. As for 'way more hurt', majorities generally need less legal protection. yes it hurt more people then it helped, it was written for a minority04/16/2014 - 8:30am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician