over a third of steam games bought are never played

[ElFenix]

http://hexus.net/gaming/news/industry/68781-over-third-steam-games-bought-never-played/


would have figured it was a higher percent than that.

 

[manimal]

Article mentioned played before 2001. Could have been 2004 but alot of the games listed were out before that and they probably got played and were done with before they started counting that metric.

I bet those numbers are seriously inflated by this.

 

[Murloc]

that's what sales and superpacks and easiness of buying do. Also the lower prices, B&M shops simply don't sell most simpler games that you see on steam, just the pricey blockbusters.

Anyway, managing to sell people stuff that they don't need means they're good at it.

 

[DesiPower]

I have 5 in my account, I don't play ANY of them. Tried them out but they sucked harder than dyson

 

[mnewsham]

Can confirm. 8 currently installed games 106 total games in my collection

 

[Schmide]

83 games played prob 6 have 2 installed currently.

 

[manly]

I'm probably over 90% never even installed.

 

[Imp]

It's because of the sales... bastards.

I'm guilt of maybe 1 or 2 games that I haven't really played. They're installed and I played them for a few minutes, so I'm probably not counted.

 

[WT]

Seems low. Should be about 80+%

 

[ThatsABigOne]

Have 6 games and only play TF2.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Recorded hours on Steam don't always reflect actual hours played. I know we have some games that we've collectively spent at least a decent amount of time in, that are registered at 0 or 1 hours because of offline mode or something.

 

[darkxshade]

Guilty

 

[mrjminer]

Don't think this statistic is really important. Bundles and sales are almost always going to do this. You'd probably see a lot less "never played" games if people didn't just consider them as a bonus with a bundle.

Most of the time with bundles, there's one-two games that I want and that I would pay the bundle price for alone due to the heavy discount. If the bundle wasn't cheaper than or about the same price as what I would pay for the games out of it I wanted, I don't get it. If it's not cheaper, I take a quick look at what else is included and if any of them look like I *might* play them, I might pay a couple of bucks more than what I would for just those couple of games I wanted.

More importantly, I don't feel ripped off; I feel like I got a reasonable or damn good deal every time.

 

[Puppies04]

Would be a hell of a lot lower if it wasn't for the humble bundles. I must have 30 games I haven't even installed from those bundles.

 

[ImpulsE69]

I've noticed in my own collection there are some odds and ends that artificially inflate those numbers. DLC counts as 1, beta/demos that are separate count as 1, etc. There are also dev/mod/map tools that are automatically put into your collection that count as well. None of which I've ever touched, and I think there are around 20-30 of them or more.

 

[lord_emperor]

1 game purchased 1 game played. Guess I'm abnormal.

 

[biostud]

Sounds right. But I've stopped buying new games until I've actually tried the other ones. Unless i know it's one I really want.

 

[MongGrel]

Probably is higher, I do not personally.

 

[PlanetJosh]

Don't have a large Steam collection, just only about 25 games going back to 2000. It wasn't much effort for me to play at least some of each one.

 

[EliteRetard]

~800 Steam games here, another 60+ on disk or other services.

Played maybe 100...that number increasing exponentially as I get better hardware.
I recently upgraded to a high end rig 2010 (up from 2006, which could only run ~20 games).

Currently have 169 games installed, but several still don't run good enough yet.
Lots of little games I haven't had the time for, but I will play them all eventually.
One game in particular has sucked a lot of my time, with over 1,000 hours played.