Eurogamer hits 5.2 million unique visitors

Thursday, 17th February 2011 13:13 GMT By Johnny Cullen

Eurogamer’s announced it reached 5.2 million unique vistors for its websites during November 2010.

The figures are from the site’s latest ABCE audit, which says that 5,216,449 “unique browsers” visited the EG sites during the month, a 15 percent increase from the same timeframe last year.

The network averaged 233,949 daily unique browsers and more than 1 million page impressions.

“We’ve come a long way since our first ABCE audit in 2005,” said Eurogamer boss Rupert Loman.

“Despite also expanding into new areas such as events we’ve consistently shown stellar growth on the Eurogamer websites and we’re clearly still the leading site for core gamers across Europe.”

The numbers do not include traffic to other Eurogamer-owned websites or partners, including VG247,, RockPaperShotgun or



  1. Dannybuoy

    I never visit Eurogamer. I get all I need from VG247 and a few others.

    #1 4 years ago
  2. mojo

    Digital foundry is gold!

    #2 4 years ago
  3. Joe Anderson

    Makes me feel better about selling my site and its small 150k per month userbase :)

    #3 4 years ago
  4. StolenGlory

    I visit EG a fair bit.

    They have an ‘Ignore Poster’ button also on their comments threads.

    *Hint* :)

    #4 4 years ago
  5. Blerk

    Most of the people in the comments threads are certainly ‘unique’.

    #5 4 years ago
  6. dirigiblebill

    Bramwell’s going to need a new mattress ;)

    #6 4 years ago
  7. DSB

    Shameless nepotism :P

    They don’t have much I can use personally. Their reviews aren’t properly edited. Way too many just go off on some deeply personal OCD picnic that doesn’t really serve you as a consumer, or end up running into 4 pages just so some selfindulgent writer can sniff his own farts for a bit longer.

    Lots of current content though. That’ll always get you some readers.

    #7 4 years ago
  8. Gadzooks!

    EG has troll moderation and an ignore button so I spend most of my time there now.

    VG247 is a hollow shell of what it used to be, unfortunately.

    #8 4 years ago
  9. dirigiblebill

    “They don’t have much I can use personally. Their reviews aren’t properly edited.”

    I like to think you’re entitled to write for as long as you can write entertainingly, and the EG lot seldom disappoint in that regard :)

    #9 4 years ago
  10. OlderGamer


    I’d mod this site in a flash if Pat wanted me to.

    Just putting that out there.

    #10 4 years ago
  11. DSB

    Except reviews aren’t meant to be entertainment.

    They should be well written enough to keep you reading from a commercial point of view, but the ultimate purpose is still to treat the games.

    “Is it any good?” – That’s really all you have to answer. A review is saying yes or no, and making a case for it. The fact that it’s turned into a way for a few pseudo-intellectuals to get themselves off in print is pretty sad to me.

    But whether you get away with it ultimately depends on the audience I guess :P

    #11 4 years ago
  12. StolenGlory


    I completely agree. Ellie’s troll-tastic reviews alone are a clear argument for content over entertainment in reviews and the lack of any kind of established balance therein.

    #12 4 years ago
  13. Rudderless

    Reviews should obviously be informative, but I think above all else they SHOULD be entertaining. Silly to claim that they’re not /meant/ to be.

    A review shouldn’t simply be a buyers’ guide. Otherwise you might has well just have a list of pros and cons and a score at the end.

    It’s a pity more gamers don’t want to read quality writing – or at least are satisfied by the most flat and basic of appraisals. People whinge about games journalism all the time, but whenever anyone tries anything different, the complaints soon rack up.

    #13 4 years ago
  14. StolenGlory

    I don’t mind a bit of journalistic flair in the writing that I read, but when they disappear up their own rectums and begin self-indulging in their own supposed literary brillance, then I stop caring.

    It’s a tough balance to strike I guess.

    #14 4 years ago
  15. OlderGamer

    The trouble is how do you make one entertaining w/o it becoming biased or opnionated?

    TBH, in most cases I could careless about a review and would rather see a fact sheet with running video.

    Tell me what the game features. Show me video of the features in action. Leave the slants, quips, and jabs for an editorial(which btw this site could use).

    The editorial I mean. Once a week, twice a month, whatever. For entertainment. Get gaming news talked about, maybe with behind the headlines tid bits that the average reader isn’t going to know.

    #15 4 years ago
  16. YoungZer0

    @11: So i guess you just have to ignore half of the videogame reviewers out there. Starting with GiantBomb and

    #16 4 years ago
  17. dirigiblebill

    “Except reviews aren’t meant to be entertainment.”

    Perhaps not, but reviews can still be entertaining :) I don’t think telling the reader something’s worth/not worth buying and giving the reader something they’ll enjoy reading are incompatible goals.

    Not sure how fair it is to gloss EG’s reviews as “pseudo-intellectual” or “OCD picnics”, either. There are fruitier specimens, sure, but I’d still take the majority over the cliche-fests we read elsewhere, however succinct. If they’re long-winded, that’s generally because they’re saying something interesting.

    What’s “a commercial point of view” when it applies to “well written”?

    #17 4 years ago
  18. Patrick Garratt

    I think we may be reaching mod time. The platform trolling is getting in the way a bit.

    #18 4 years ago
  19. StolenGlory



    #19 4 years ago
  20. DSB

    Of course, I totally agree that there’s room to be entertaining while reviewing something. It’s just pretty important that the ultimate purpose isn’t to crack funnies or throw clever anectdotes around. The aim is to critisize, and to at least appear competent in doing so.

    The commercial point of view consists in making sure people read you from the first paragraph to the last. That’s simply the best way of ensuring that they’ll want to look at more on your site, or pick up the next copy of your magazine.

    I’m obviously within a picky minority, and I do take journalism pretty seriously, writing more than a fair share of music reviews myself, but I’d say 80% of games writers lose me within 1-3 paragraphs. Just seeing that a review contains 4 pages makes me groan and surf on, unless the first couple of paragraphs are absolutely fucking stunning.

    Fundamentally I think the best way of ensuring that you don’t waste peoples time is to keep things as concise as possible. It’s easy to write 4 pages about something, all you have to do is lose any sense of self-criticism. I understand that it’s hard to present a game in less than 1½ pages worth of copy, but if someone can’t make themselves clear in 3 pages or less, then I don’t see that person as much of a journalist.

    I just see them as someone venturing into usually very shoddy prose, at the expense of my time.

    @16 Sadly that’s very accurate. At least you can always skip forward to the scores eh?

    #20 4 years ago
  21. xino

    all thanks to Euro Gamer Expo

    #21 4 years ago
  22. Grimrita

    their reviews are mostly full of BS…Spore 9/10 – pah!

    #22 4 years ago
  23. DSB

    Good example ^^ What about Braid 10/10?

    That’s one of the most godawful reviews I’ve ever read. I’m pretty sure he texted cockpics to Johnathan Blow once he finished that.

    #23 4 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.