Usage & attitude study
Is Your Gaming Gear Holding You Back?
In a Usage & Attitude study of 1,000 Indian PC gamers, 81.5% are likely to replace or upgrade an accessory within 12 months and 81.0% would switch brands if a rival solved their main problem. 97.4% would pay more for a meaningful fix. Indian brands gain more from matching global performance than from a lower price.
Explore the findingsRate 4 or 5 out of 5 on replacing or upgrading an accessory within 12 months
Rate 4 or 5 out of 5 on switching if another brand solved their main problem
Say a meaningful fix would justify paying more
Based on 1,000 completed responses. Usage & attitude study.
What we set out to answer, and what we found
We wanted to measure peripheral demand, readiness to switch and the features worth engineering next
How big is the near-term replacement window?
We asked how likely each gamer is to replace or upgrade at least one accessory in the next 12 months, then read that intent by age.
How loyal are incumbent brands really?
We tested switching directly. If another brand solved your main problem at an acceptable price, how likely would you be to switch?
What will gamers pay for, and what will win them to Indian brands?
We asked whether a meaningful fix to their biggest frustration would justify a higher price, and what an Indian brand has to offer to be seriously considered.
Which problems and features deserve the engineering spend?
Gamers were routed by the peripherals they own (mouse, keyboard, headphone or earphone) and asked what they most want improved.
Gamers are ready to buy. 81.5% of PC gamers rate themselves likely to replace or upgrade at least one accessory within 12 months (42.1% at 5 out of 5, 39.4% at 4). Intent is firmest among 36 to 45 year-olds, at 51.4% top-box.
Loyalty to current brands is weak. 81.0% would switch if an alternative solved their main problem at an acceptable price, and only 5.8% rate their switching likelihood low. The report sees fixing reliability and ergonomics issues as the main way to win them over.
Pain points give brands pricing room. 97.4% (974 of 1,000) say a meaningful improvement to their biggest accessory problem would justify paying more. The report reads this as meaning brands do not need margin-diluting discounts.
Indian brands win on value but must clear a performance bar. 63.9% rate Indian brands better value for money than global brands, yet 31.5% need performance matching established global brands before they will seriously consider one. Only 21.0% pick a clearly lower price.
Indian brands already lead the ideal-brand benchmark. 40.5% align their ideal-setup benchmark with Indian brands against 20.5% for global brands. On software and customisation, Indian brands tie with other named brands at 29.0%.
Lead with comfort and speed. Comfort during long sessions is in the top three priorities for 67.0% of gamers, and low latency has the strongest average rank (1.75) with 46.3% of first-place votes.
Spec Parity Demand
Need performance matching global brands to consider an Indian brand
Indian Brands vs Ideal
Align the ideal-setup benchmark with Indian brands, against 20.5% for global brands
A 12-Month Upgrade Window and an 81.0% Switching-Ready Market
Two questions matter commercially. Will gamers buy, and will they buy from someone else?
Upgrade Intent and Switching Likelihood, Rated 1 to 5
Base: 1,000 respondents. 5 = very likely
View the data behind this chart
| Replace or upgrade an accessory in the next 12 months | Switch if another brand solved my main problem | |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | 42.1% | 40.4% |
| 4 | 39.4% | 40.6% |
| 3 | 12.7% | 13.2% |
| 2 | 4.6% | 4.5% |
| 1 | 1.2% | 1.3% |
01. Upgrade intent reaches 81.5% top-two-box: 42.1% at 5 and 39.4% at 4. 36 to 45 year-olds lead at 51.4% top-box, which is 9.3 points above the 42.1% overall, against 41.1% among 18 to 24s and 41.5% among 25 to 35s.
02. Switching readiness is 81.0% top-two-box: 40.4% at 5 and 40.6% at 4. 36 to 45s again lead at 48.6% top-box, against 39.7% among 18 to 24s.
03. Only 5.8% rate their switching likelihood low (4.5% at 2 and 1.3% at 1), which the report reads as current-brand loyalty offering almost no defence against a competitor that solves the problem.
04. Crossing frustrations with switching intent, poor sound or microphone performance produces the most ready switchers. 79 rate their switching likelihood 5 and another 79 rate it 4. Lag or latency and discomfort in long sessions each account for 65 top-box switchers.
97.4% Would Pay a Premium for Problem Resolution
01. 97.4%, 974 of 1,000 respondents, say a meaningful improvement to their biggest gaming-accessory problem would justify paying more. The report treats recurring hardware and software flaws as serious friction for gamers, not minor annoyances.
02. Taken with the 81.0% switching readiness, the report concludes that gamers defect when a product actually works better, and rock-bottom pricing is not what moves them. Brands can compete without margin-diluting discounts.
Comfort and Low Latency Lead the Feature Hierarchy
Gamers picked the three features a new product should prioritise first, from the accessory features they had selected.
Low Latency in the Top 3, by Age
Share of each age group placing low latency or fast response in their top three
View the data behind this chart
| Answer | Share |
|---|---|
| 18 to 24 | 44.4% |
| 25 to 35 | 55.4% |
01. Comfort during long sessions is the most widely demanded attribute, selected in the top three by 67.0% of gamers and by 68.0% of 18 to 24s. For younger players, ergonomics is the minimum requirement.
02. Low latency or fast response is the most urgent feature. It has the strongest average rank at 1.75 and 46.3% of first-place votes among those who ranked it.
03. 55.4% of 25 to 35s put low latency in their top three against 44.4% of 18 to 24s, an 11-point gap. The report says this calls for performance-led messaging to older cohorts.
Indian Brands Must Prove Parity, Not Just Price
The report tested whether affordability alone wins over discerning PC gamers, or whether a specification hurdle comes first.
What an Indian Brand Must Offer to Be Seriously Considered
Base: 1,000 respondents. Multi-select, average 1.95 options chosen
View the data behind this chart
| Answer | Share |
|---|---|
| Performance matching established global brands | 31.5% |
| Features designed around Indian gamers | 26.5% |
| Faster and more dependable service | 24.1% |
| Better availability in India | 24% |
| Simpler and more reliable software | 22.9% |
| A longer or clearer warranty | 22.9% |
| Strong independent reviews | 22% |
| A clearly lower price | 21% |
| Nothing in particular | 0.5% |
Indian Brands vs Global Brands on Value for Money
Base: 1,000 respondents
View the data behind this chart
| Answer | Share |
|---|---|
| Much better value | 22.7% |
| Somewhat better value | 41.2% |
| About the same | 23.4% |
| Somewhat worse value | 10.7% |
| Much worse value | 1.8% |
| I cannot compare them | 0.2% |
01. Global-tier performance comes first at 31.5%, ahead of features designed around Indian gamers at 26.5%. A clearly lower price ranks last of the active factors at 21.0%. The report warns that positioning as the budget alternative will hurt conversion.
02. 60.0% named only one requirement, and the average was 1.95 options per respondent (range 1 to 8). Among the small 55+ group, 52.2% chose global performance parity against 28.0% of 36 to 45s.
03. On value for money, 63.9% rate Indian brands better (41.2% somewhat better, 22.7% much better). Only 12.5% rate them worse (10.7% somewhat worse, 1.8% much worse).
Indian Brands Lead Ideal-Setup Benchmarks at 40.5%
Gamers compared their current setup with what they would expect from the ideal gaming-accessory brand, overall and on three attributes.
Brand Tier Gamers Associate With the Ideal Standard
Base: 1,000 respondents. Each attribute sums to 100%
View the data behind this chart
| Overall setup vs ideal | Value for money | Service and warranty | Software and customisation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Indian gaming brand | 40.5% | 40.9% | 29.6% | 29% |
| Other named brand | 25.8% | 29% | 20.6% | 29% |
| Global gaming brand | 20.5% | 14.7% | 23.8% | 22.1% |
| Generic or unbranded | 13.2% | 15.4% | 26% | 19.9% |
01. 40.5% align their ideal-setup benchmark with Indian gaming brands, ahead of other named brands at 25.8% and nearly double global brands at 20.5%. Among 18 to 24s it is 41.4% against 20.3% for global brands.
02. Indian brands lead on value for money (40.9% vs 14.7% global) and service and warranty (29.6% vs 23.8% global). Generic products outrank global brands on service (26.0% vs 23.8%).
03. On software and customisation, Indian and other named brands tie at 29.0%, ahead of global brands at 22.1%. 18 to 24s favour Indian brands here at 31.8%, against 19.6% among 36 to 45s, who lean global at 29.0%.
Mice and Keyboards: Reliability and Ergonomics Outrank Extras
Respondents were routed by the peripherals they own. Counts below are mentions from active owners of each category.
Most Wanted Mouse Improvements
Mentions from active gaming mouse owners
View the data behind this chart
| Answer | Value |
|---|---|
| Reliable switches without double-clicking | 156 |
| Long battery life | 149 |
| RGB lighting | 142 |
| Lightweight construction | 130 |
| Ergonomic shape customisation | 129 |
| Low click latency | 124 |
| Button remapping | 116 |
Most Wanted Keyboard Improvements
Mentions from active gaming keyboard owners
View the data behind this chart
| Answer | Value |
|---|---|
| Comfortable layout and wrist support | 200 |
| Fast and consistent key response | 185 |
| Detachable or replaceable parts | 180 |
| Easy key remapping and profiles | 173 |
| RGB customisation | 171 |
| Wireless connectivity | 165 |
01. For mouse owners, switch reliability without double-clicking leads at 156 mentions, ahead of long battery life at 149 and click latency at 124. Keyboard users also rate switch reliability (125) and battery longevity (123) highly.
02. On keyboards, comfortable layout and wrist support leads at 200 mentions, followed by fast, consistent key response at 185. Detachable or replaceable parts (180) outrank RGB customisation (171) and wireless connectivity (165).
03. Headphone owners put useful microphone monitoring (161) and clear positional audio (157) ahead of durable cables or hinges (131), and earphone owners rank clear positional game audio first (104).
What we would recommend
Practical priorities drawn from this study for further validation.
Prioritise hardware parity in flagship tiers.
Engineer mice and keyboards to match or beat top global sensor-latency and switch-durability benchmarks. This speaks directly to the 31.5% who need performance parity before considering an Indian brand.
Capture near-term upgrades with conquest marketing.
Build acquisition messaging around fixing common failures of older hardware, such as double-clicking and discomfort. That targets the 81.0% who are ready to switch.
Price for premium margins on problem-solving products.
With 97.4% willing to pay more for a meaningful fix, launch feature-rich, ergonomic product lines and stay out of the low-margin entry tiers.
Focus development on responsiveness and session comfort.
Put R&D into ultra-low-latency inputs and lightweight ergonomics. The report plays down high-capacity wireless batteries, although long battery life still ranks second among mouse owners at 149 mentions.
