Roblox faces criticism for 'exploiting' young game developers(gamasutra.com)
gamasutra.com
Roblox faces criticism for 'exploiting' young game developers
https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/387113/Roblox_faces_criticism_for_exploiting_young_game_developers.php
226 comments
>Second, there’s the matter of how extensively Robux (Roblox’s in-app currency) are used to navigate the creator economy. Roblox creators are paid first by receiving a cut of Robux that comes from the sale, which they can use to purchase other Roblox experiences, in-game assets, cosmetics, etc. That means once a developer enters the Robux economy, their money is all spent inside the Roblox system until they’re able to withdraw it.
...
But to withdraw it, they need to have raked in roughly $1,000 worth of Robux.
This part seems pretty indefensible. Like yeah to a certain extent all online content platforms have a gate like this, but I've never heard of one that high. YouTube e will pay you as soon as you make something like $20 iirc. And the fact that they pay you in their gated currency which they then allow you to spend but only within their system seems like am obvious self-serving money grab.
This part seems pretty indefensible. Like yeah to a certain extent all online content platforms have a gate like this, but I've never heard of one that high. YouTube e will pay you as soon as you make something like $20 iirc. And the fact that they pay you in their gated currency which they then allow you to spend but only within their system seems like am obvious self-serving money grab.
> But to withdraw it, they need to have raked in roughly $1,000 worth of Robux.
It's even worse than that. They sell robux at one rate and cash them out for developers at a very different rate. That $1,000 worth of Robux becomes $350 when you go to extract it. So they're taking cuts twice, once on the actual sale and again whenever you try to turn it into real money instead of their scrip.
It's even worse than that. They sell robux at one rate and cash them out for developers at a very different rate. That $1,000 worth of Robux becomes $350 when you go to extract it. So they're taking cuts twice, once on the actual sale and again whenever you try to turn it into real money instead of their scrip.
> That $1,000 worth of Robux becomes $350 when you go to extract it.
Knowing nothing at all about Robux I’m not sure I follow. When you say “$1,000 worth of Robux” here you mean $1,000 USD, right? And not 1,000 units of Robux?
So if I’m a developer on the platform and I’ve earned however many Robux equal $1,000 USD and I initiate a transfer then my actual cash receipts will be ~$350 USD? Am I understanding that correctly? Because that seems nuts. Especially when they’re targeting kids as their primary “developers”.
Knowing nothing at all about Robux I’m not sure I follow. When you say “$1,000 worth of Robux” here you mean $1,000 USD, right? And not 1,000 units of Robux?
So if I’m a developer on the platform and I’ve earned however many Robux equal $1,000 USD and I initiate a transfer then my actual cash receipts will be ~$350 USD? Am I understanding that correctly? Because that seems nuts. Especially when they’re targeting kids as their primary “developers”.
Yes, you understand correctly. The minimum amount to withdraw is an amount that would cost 1000 USD to buy. When withdrawing that amount, you would get 350 USD
Ah, thank you. One follow-up question: if I don’t cash out my $1,000 USD worth of Robux can I spend them in game at their full $1,000 USD value?
Yes, you can spend it in-game at the full value.
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but it's also important to note that not all Robux is equal. There's more information at https://en.help.roblox.com/hc/en-us/articles/115005718246 under section 3.B.
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but it's also important to note that not all Robux is equal. There's more information at https://en.help.roblox.com/hc/en-us/articles/115005718246 under section 3.B.
3.B “Minimum of 100,000 earned Robux in your account. In order to protect against money laundering and comply with applicable law, we limit all Cash Outs to "earned" Robux. Robux are considered "earned" if you receive them by receiving payments from a bona fide third party transaction through the Services for (a) virtual items (such as clothing for an avatar) that you created or (b) virtual things in your game or for your game or experience. This means that Robux acquired in other ways (e.g., receiving Robux as part of a membership plan or referral bonus, a purchase of Robux or gift card, or trading/selling virtual goods that you did not create) are not considered "earned". We will determine how much you are eligible to Cash Out by totaling the amount of Robux earned (over the lifetime of the account) and subtracting the amounts previously paid out to you through DevEx;”
Also note that there is a comment in the video that you need to be careful how you spend your Robux for buying development, because if you are not then a cut gets taken, which maybe relates to 3B for the person you are paying?
Also note that there is a comment in the video that you need to be careful how you spend your Robux for buying development, because if you are not then a cut gets taken, which maybe relates to 3B for the person you are paying?
Ugh. It feels like Roblox is the MLM of gaming.
Do anti trust laws apply in this case? Is there any way to tip the investigating authorities to investigate in the predatory practices of Roblox?
Wow, that is pretty awful.
> my actual cash receipts will be ~$350 USD?
Yes, ignoring any tax requirements because I'm not a tax attorney. You have to have 100k Robux (Rb) to initiate a withdrawl, that 100k Rb costs 1000 USD (ignoring any bulk deals they may run) to buy if you just purchased it from Roblox, but when you sell it to Roblox for USD you get 350 USD. So depending on how you look at it it is worth either 1k or 350 USD. The article was using 1k as the frame and it's what it would cost you to get that much buying directly so to me that's the most accurate.
Yes, ignoring any tax requirements because I'm not a tax attorney. You have to have 100k Robux (Rb) to initiate a withdrawl, that 100k Rb costs 1000 USD (ignoring any bulk deals they may run) to buy if you just purchased it from Roblox, but when you sell it to Roblox for USD you get 350 USD. So depending on how you look at it it is worth either 1k or 350 USD. The article was using 1k as the frame and it's what it would cost you to get that much buying directly so to me that's the most accurate.
I believe it is like Forex but with a really bad spread. You can buy Robux for $X USD, but when you sell robux you only get $.35X USD.
[deleted]
That is insane. How are they even getting away with such a scheme? Did they start out at a 1:1 ratio and change it once network effects and lock-in happened.
They get away with it because it's all kids that doesn't know any better.
In literally all other games I know of the ratio is 1:0 since you can't cash out their in-game currency at all. Do you have any of example of a game or a platform where you can sell the in-game currency for the purchase price?
Secondlife have a fair spread and is player to player.
They take 3.5% of fee when you are transfering it to USD. (Sellers)
Buyers are charged charged a 7.50% transaction fee with a minimum of US$ 1.49 and a maximum of US$ 9.99 per transaction
------ The current spread on Lindex (SL Forex) is :
BUY: L$242 / US$1.00 (L$14,816 Remaining) SELL: L$249 / US$1.00 (L$29,411 remaining)
They take 3.5% of fee when you are transfering it to USD. (Sellers)
Buyers are charged charged a 7.50% transaction fee with a minimum of US$ 1.49 and a maximum of US$ 9.99 per transaction
------ The current spread on Lindex (SL Forex) is :
BUY: L$242 / US$1.00 (L$14,816 Remaining) SELL: L$249 / US$1.00 (L$29,411 remaining)
The closest I can think of are systems like Eve, where players can trade in-game currency for game time tokens purchased by other players. 1:1 ratio, but the real money is proxied by game time so that no one can actually remove cash.
Can you transfer it? If so, seems like it would be hard to prevent secondary markets from forming.
No, they don't have a way to move anything other than games. Probably specifically to avoid the chance of a secondary market forming. Trying to police real world trading is hard so they just cut off the chance for it entirely.
https://en.help.roblox.com/hc/en-us/articles/203313090-Can-I...
https://en.help.roblox.com/hc/en-us/articles/203313090-Can-I...
I was wrong there is a trading system this is just about moving items between accounts. Some places implement balanced trade requirements to get around RWT.
Section 3.F of Terms of Abuse:
“the following will make you ineligible for a Cash Out:” “attempting to exchange Robux for real currency other than through DevEx”
https://en.help.roblox.com/hc/en-us/articles/115005718246
“the following will make you ineligible for a Cash Out:” “attempting to exchange Robux for real currency other than through DevEx”
https://en.help.roblox.com/hc/en-us/articles/115005718246
You can sort of transfer it via trading. There is a black market that exists, but it is FULL of scammers.
[deleted]
[deleted]
They need a stable-coin.
Sounds like they already have one.
I was thinking something more stable than "buy for X and sell for X/10". Probably something not controlled by Roblox at all (USDC or DAI?). That would be giving up a lot of control, but it would solve the problems they're giving the kiddos.
Yeah Roblox doesn't want that. They want to be able to take a cut every chance they get and also to encourage people to just keep their money in Roblox to keep it moving through purchases so they can keep taking 75% cuts instead of the /only/ 65% they taken when someone cashes out.
Classic case of trying to use technology to fix a regulatory issue. You can’t use technology to fix the fact that Roblox wants to extract value from its creators twice. Either they’d create a crypto currency with the same exploitive structure, or you’d have to fight to legally force them to pay out fairly using whatever crypto they settle on. And by the time you’ve done the latter, you could’ve just forced them to pay in USD.
They can already solve that problem, it’s literally a rate they program. They don’t need a shitcoin to do that.
> YouTube will pay you as soon as you make something like $20 iirc.
Isn't it $100?
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/1709871?hl=en
Isn't it $100?
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/1709871?hl=en
On Twitch it's also $100.
Used to be lower.
When? This was the level I failed to meet for AdWords when I had a blog around 2007. What Google or other companies were doing in 2005 is so long ago that it’s hardly relevant.
Not for youtube. I made a video and got stuck at $85 or so which has been sitting there. And the gate to get any ad revenue at all has been raised so I'd have to get pretty serious to get the hours watched to earn the remaining $15
In California (I assume other states have similar) the trick is to wait long enough such that it becomes unclaimed property. At that point, Google will surrender your 85 dollars to the state government and you can fill out some paperwork to collect it.
Source: happened to me via a Minecraft channel I used to run over a decade ago and essentially abandoned around 2013.
Source: happened to me via a Minecraft channel I used to run over a decade ago and essentially abandoned around 2013.
I wonder if the old regulations around company scrip and stores might be used to legally undermine such tactics.
It doesn’t matter if you’re creating digital experiences, you must pay people with money, not company tokens.
It doesn’t matter if you’re creating digital experiences, you must pay people with money, not company tokens.
You would first have to establish these kids were employed by Roblox, and I would predict that to be a very uphill battle.
It would be hard to argue Roblox is paying anyone in exchange for work.
It would be hard to argue Roblox is paying anyone in exchange for work.
It’s long time that we eliminate the employee and contractor distinction for worker protections. Even if these kids don’t rate for benefits, they should still have the same protections that a full time employee has around being paid on time in cash.
There’s probably a long tail where a tiny fraction of devs make more than that. Free labor!
By the same logic, YCombinator is "exploiting our free labor" through Hacker News. People write thoughtful comments, get nothing in return, and YC benefits from free publicity. Same for facebook posts, instagram, reddit, and every business that benefits from community and network effects.
Same for every video game that allows mods, custom levels, and so on. The only difference is that Minecraft users make no money at all for their efforts. How terrible! Poor children!
Either that, or people just enjoy being creative, making things is fun, and it's okay for kids to just enjoy making things and sharing them with each other, even if (oh, gasp!) the business that built the engine benefits from it. And being able to make any money from this at all is just a nice bonus.
Same for every video game that allows mods, custom levels, and so on. The only difference is that Minecraft users make no money at all for their efforts. How terrible! Poor children!
Either that, or people just enjoy being creative, making things is fun, and it's okay for kids to just enjoy making things and sharing them with each other, even if (oh, gasp!) the business that built the engine benefits from it. And being able to make any money from this at all is just a nice bonus.
> The only difference is that Minecraft users make no money at all for their efforts.
Minecraft dev. here, not strictly true. We have a pretty bustling marketplace full of paid and free content (maps, skins, etc.) but the process to release such content right now is pretty hands-on and not suitable for non-adults.
Minecraft dev. here, not strictly true. We have a pretty bustling marketplace full of paid and free content (maps, skins, etc.) but the process to release such content right now is pretty hands-on and not suitable for non-adults.
I beg to differ. HN is free because the contributors and audience provide a significant input funnel for founders, employees, and investors who directly participate in the YC economy. It's a recruitment and promotional tool for all three groups.
However, YC does not charge people to play HN in the way that Roblox charges for that game. No one is counting my minutes on HN and sending someone a payment, or a bill. There is no direct monetization of my UGC.
Mod.io is a gaming add-on (for mods) that also has no in-platform direct monetization of UGC assets. Of course, the games that use mod.io do it because having UGC at all brings the right kind of players and those players do pay.
So it is possible to make money, have UGC, and not be exploitative. I don't think Roblox can say that's where they are right now.
However, YC does not charge people to play HN in the way that Roblox charges for that game. No one is counting my minutes on HN and sending someone a payment, or a bill. There is no direct monetization of my UGC.
Mod.io is a gaming add-on (for mods) that also has no in-platform direct monetization of UGC assets. Of course, the games that use mod.io do it because having UGC at all brings the right kind of players and those players do pay.
So it is possible to make money, have UGC, and not be exploitative. I don't think Roblox can say that's where they are right now.
Most of these kids are just sharing games with their friends... like posting a video to youtube.
Free content maybe, but not free labor exactly IMO.
Free content maybe, but not free labor exactly IMO.
It's labor regardless of how much money you make off of it, though I think maybe you mean that they're little games that aren't the result of much effort?
Is YouTube getting free labor when I upload a video?
I feel like the exchange there is not about labor...
I feel like the exchange there is not about labor...
Yes it is. That is what they make their money off of, the difference between what they earn off of the labor of the video creators and the money they pay out. If nobody uploaded videos, youtube could not sell attention just like if no steelworkers arrived, the steel mill can not sell steel. That applies to all social media/user generated content platforms.
Now, you might argue that this does not feel like labor because it's more voluntary than labor usually is. Which is totally correct and exactly why this industry is so lucrative.
Now, you might argue that this does not feel like labor because it's more voluntary than labor usually is. Which is totally correct and exactly why this industry is so lucrative.
Not sure why you were downvoted but you're right. YouTube, in a total inversion of the TV business model, doesn't pay creators for anything until after it's been monetized -- and then they take a cut first. The cut is so early in the process that millions of videos are monetized and the creators are not even aware, much less paid.
This is the reverse of the Hollywood TV model where you paid creators first and then tried to monetize the content you owned. It's certainly still labor to create it. The only things that have changed are the ownership, licensing, and payment stream.
This is the reverse of the Hollywood TV model where you paid creators first and then tried to monetize the content you owned. It's certainly still labor to create it. The only things that have changed are the ownership, licensing, and payment stream.
Youtube creators can take their content elsewhere, at any time I believe. Traditional TV studios have longer term contracts and there are often more folks involved than lone YouTubers and their patrons.
They can take their content, but not their audience, making the whole thing rather useless. The only thing that enables that in film is the relative neutrality of cinemas and streaming platforms.
I feel like that really distorts my relationship / expectations with YouTube and just turns just about anything into 'labor'.
Yes, anything that takes the work of a person (making a video, writing a game, writing a blog) is labor.
I don't think recognizing it as labor needs to change how you feel about doing it at all. I'm doing labor that makes HN more monetarily valuable right now by writing replies and I'm obviously fine with that. And as to almost everything being labor in some way... well, that's the world we live in for better or worse.
The threshold to cash out seems high, but the percentage cut is curious, and I'm not convinced "exploitative" is the right word. It's a high cut, but is there anything else that makes it anywhere as close to make a game and share it with your friends? It seems to be in an entirely different league as any of the app stores or PC game development, so a higher cut there would make sense.
The "it's just for fun!" argument does cut both ways - then why introduce real money into the ecosystem at all? - but has an obvious "because real money is needed to make the product and ecosystem exist" answer. Is taking this much real money necessary? That seems like a much harder question. You could say it's a bit like college sports - playing a game with your friends and there's some institution that's taking all the money, and then, yes, if Roblox is rolling in huge profits and distributing a penance, they deserve some pressure on that.
The "it's just for fun!" argument does cut both ways - then why introduce real money into the ecosystem at all? - but has an obvious "because real money is needed to make the product and ecosystem exist" answer. Is taking this much real money necessary? That seems like a much harder question. You could say it's a bit like college sports - playing a game with your friends and there's some institution that's taking all the money, and then, yes, if Roblox is rolling in huge profits and distributing a penance, they deserve some pressure on that.
from what i can tell, its 30% at transaction time, then 65% at withdrawal time.
That is not necessary.
That is not necessary.
[deleted](2)
Roblox taking a 151/200 AKA 75.5% total cut matches what I've heard from friends in the games industry.
I don't honestly know about Roblox, but I've read that YouTube (to name one of the most popular UGC platforms) keeps 45% of the advertising revenues.
Looking at the numbers they made around $46 billion in the past three years.
Do we know how much of those 46 billions went to creators?
YouTube videos are also very different from video games, one can easily make 30 YouTube videos in 30 days, video games require weeks (if not more), it's easier to give up.
The incentive is very different.
Paying for low effort content posted frequently rewards consistency, YouTube needs their creators to keep making fresh content, not their best content, new is enough.
Video games not so much, they have to be at least appealing and a higher threshold could be better to keep creators focused on finishing their work and/or maintain an higher quality of the product, instead of cashing out quickly by making very cheap games just for the 50 dollars of payout.
Looking at the numbers they made around $46 billion in the past three years.
Do we know how much of those 46 billions went to creators?
YouTube videos are also very different from video games, one can easily make 30 YouTube videos in 30 days, video games require weeks (if not more), it's easier to give up.
The incentive is very different.
Paying for low effort content posted frequently rewards consistency, YouTube needs their creators to keep making fresh content, not their best content, new is enough.
Video games not so much, they have to be at least appealing and a higher threshold could be better to keep creators focused on finishing their work and/or maintain an higher quality of the product, instead of cashing out quickly by making very cheap games just for the 50 dollars of payout.
Worth noting that, since the currency can also come from a handful of other sources (e.g. trading cosmetics), each cash-out is manually reviewed to ensure that the currency only comes from approved sources (sale of assets, games, products). Because of this, reducing the minimum payout does not scale, and at some point becomes infeasible. The article and video, of course, both fail to mention this.
Maybe throwing more manpower at the problem will let them reduce the minimum rate. Or they could work on altering their infrastructure to support a more automated system, possibly eliminating the minimum rate entirely.
Maybe throwing more manpower at the problem will let them reduce the minimum rate. Or they could work on altering their infrastructure to support a more automated system, possibly eliminating the minimum rate entirely.
> Because of this, reducing the minimum payout does not scale, and at some point becomes infeasible.
Err, wat? This check could trivially be automated, and in fact I'd be very surprised if it wasn't already. All they have to do is maintain a separate (hidden) counter of "cashout-able" currency in their account, which only increases when the money comes from an eligible source (and decreasing so that it never goes above the visible "real" currency).
If Roblox claims this is a manual check, well, that's very probably just a bullshit lie.
Err, wat? This check could trivially be automated, and in fact I'd be very surprised if it wasn't already. All they have to do is maintain a separate (hidden) counter of "cashout-able" currency in their account, which only increases when the money comes from an eligible source (and decreasing so that it never goes above the visible "real" currency).
If Roblox claims this is a manual check, well, that's very probably just a bullshit lie.
What I can say is that, when the payout program started, all payout requests did go through a manual process (the minimum rate was the same then, by the way). Later on, there is evidence of account "snapshots", which is used to track income made before and after Roblox bumped the exchange rate up [1], which is described with some detail [2]. So it's not unlikely that there are other kinds of counters keeping track of income sources. Even so, there is still evidence for some sort of manual processing, at least up to last December [3].
[1]: https://devforum.roblox.com/t/the-robux-exchange-rate-and-mo... [2]: https://devforum.roblox.com/t/the-robux-exchange-rate-and-mo... [3]: https://devforum.roblox.com/t/holiday-schedule-for-the-devex...
[1]: https://devforum.roblox.com/t/the-robux-exchange-rate-and-mo... [2]: https://devforum.roblox.com/t/the-robux-exchange-rate-and-mo... [3]: https://devforum.roblox.com/t/holiday-schedule-for-the-devex...
I had a blog or two that used Google AdWords circa 2008. I got very close to the $100 limit but never reached it - so Google just kept my $90. I wonder how many people and how much revenue that applies to.
I had the same issue, Google escheated the money to the state of Delaware (where they're incorporated) after a few years though. Consider checking Delaware's unclaimed property site, you may find your money there.
> But to withdraw it, they need to have raked in roughly $1,000 worth of Robux
You can thank modern accrual accounting for this.
Roblox will be allowed to move money from liability to revenue based on a schedule using some sort of historical trends supporting the method. The higher the threshold, the higher their liability but also the more money that goes back to them long-term.
You can thank modern accrual accounting for this.
Roblox will be allowed to move money from liability to revenue based on a schedule using some sort of historical trends supporting the method. The higher the threshold, the higher their liability but also the more money that goes back to them long-term.
[deleted]
It's obvious that the company is trying to create clear distinctions between hobbyists and professional devs. A low cash-out threshold seems like bait, where as a higher threshold discourages would-bes from thinking it will be easy money and filling the catalog with garbage.
Though I do concede... the catalog is filled with a lot of garbage.
Though I do concede... the catalog is filled with a lot of garbage.
Roblox is not comparable to YouTube.
When you make a video and upload it to YouTube, that creation is entirely the result of your own hard work and ingenuity. YouTube doesn't need to exist for your video to exist.
When you make a game in Roblox, you are combining some amount of hard work and ingenuity of your own with a larger amount of hard work and ingenuity by Roblox Creation.
If you want to keep all the money, then you need to do all of the work.
When you make a video and upload it to YouTube, that creation is entirely the result of your own hard work and ingenuity. YouTube doesn't need to exist for your video to exist.
When you make a game in Roblox, you are combining some amount of hard work and ingenuity of your own with a larger amount of hard work and ingenuity by Roblox Creation.
If you want to keep all the money, then you need to do all of the work.
> If you want to keep all the money, then you need to do all of the work.
The person you're responding to isn't even talking about the cut. It's the threshold at which you may take money out of the ecosystem. Both YouTube and Roblox take a cut, but with Roblox, even after the cut, you need to have made a substantial amount of money before you can see a penny of it.
The person you're responding to isn't even talking about the cut. It's the threshold at which you may take money out of the ecosystem. Both YouTube and Roblox take a cut, but with Roblox, even after the cut, you need to have made a substantial amount of money before you can see a penny of it.
By your logic unless Roblox corporation created computers they shouldn’t keep all the money, either.
I’m not sure why anyone would defend a dollar amount above $1. If you have money in you should be able to get it out immediately IMO.
I’m not sure why anyone would defend a dollar amount above $1. If you have money in you should be able to get it out immediately IMO.
I expect it'll need to be higher than $1 because there's going to be some legal matters to deal with around paying the legally-minor creators any amount of money.
To be honest, when I think about it that way, you're not going to get that far under $1000 no matter what you do. There's tax forms at the very least, and probably extra stuff to do with dealing with minors, plus generalized legal risk of being sued or investigated anyhow... we need to be dealing with more than a few bucks here before it's worth Roblox's time & risk. Some of this is the cost of protecting minors, too.
To be honest, when I think about it that way, you're not going to get that far under $1000 no matter what you do. There's tax forms at the very least, and probably extra stuff to do with dealing with minors, plus generalized legal risk of being sued or investigated anyhow... we need to be dealing with more than a few bucks here before it's worth Roblox's time & risk. Some of this is the cost of protecting minors, too.
I don’t see why the amount matters. It’s a solved problem. All of it can be aggregated and forms can be sent once at the end of the year. It’s not like this stuff has to be manually dealt with. Computers deal with virtually everything.
You’re definitely undervaluing the raw video encoding, transmission and delivery framework YouTube brings to bear there. Sure, you made a video. But that’s not the same as having a player that works in multiple browsers, support for multiple streaming bitrates and codecs, optimized global distribution and caching.. and that’s all before we get to the discoverability, hosting and channel management features.
But with a video you have the portability to take your content somewhere other than Youtube for the supporting infrastructure. Your Roblox game is much less portable.
> When you make a video and upload it to YouTube, that creation is entirely the result of your own hard work and ingenuity. YouTube doesn't need to exist for your video to exist.
YT probably does need to exist for many creators to get the kind of distribution that enables them to monetize their content including the operationally managing the scale of the site, the brand they've built and the ad network. A highly viewed piece of content is generally much more valuable than unseen content. Which isn't to say you can't monetize video outside of YT, just the YT is providing a very valuable service and it isn't clear to me that is qualitatively of less value than what Roblox provides its content creators.
YT probably does need to exist for many creators to get the kind of distribution that enables them to monetize their content including the operationally managing the scale of the site, the brand they've built and the ad network. A highly viewed piece of content is generally much more valuable than unseen content. Which isn't to say you can't monetize video outside of YT, just the YT is providing a very valuable service and it isn't clear to me that is qualitatively of less value than what Roblox provides its content creators.
Also, YT content creators and the YT algorithm are clearly affecting each other in complex ways. The content created for YT is tailored to succeed on YT, and would obviously fail on any other platform with a different recommendation engine and community.
I mean, it’s not like YouTube content creators made YouTube, by your logic YT shouldn’t be paying its content creators either.
In reality the relationship between these platforms and the creators is a necessary and mutually beneficial relationship. The exchange in value between these parties should be in a format useful to both sides: cash.
In reality the relationship between these platforms and the creators is a necessary and mutually beneficial relationship. The exchange in value between these parties should be in a format useful to both sides: cash.
I’d guess that more engineer-hours have gone into making YouTube what is than Roblox. At least, if someone’s going to express a strong claim about that, they ought to supply some numbers and not just an assertion.
[deleted]
I read the article but have not watched the video so I may be missing some context.
It really depends on how you define “exploiting”. It doesn’t seem like you _need_ to buy the ads. A kid could make a game on any platform and would encounter similar barriers.
Would it be better if the kid played Call of Duty rather than creating something? Even if the chance to profit is low does the kid get something else out of Roblox?
To my knowledge kids aren’t dropping out of high school with hopes of being a Roblox millionaire. They may dream about it but I don’t think they act on it. I dreamed about being a pro eSports gamer in high school and I’d argue my time was much worse spent doing that.
It really depends on how you define “exploiting”. It doesn’t seem like you _need_ to buy the ads. A kid could make a game on any platform and would encounter similar barriers.
Would it be better if the kid played Call of Duty rather than creating something? Even if the chance to profit is low does the kid get something else out of Roblox?
To my knowledge kids aren’t dropping out of high school with hopes of being a Roblox millionaire. They may dream about it but I don’t think they act on it. I dreamed about being a pro eSports gamer in high school and I’d argue my time was much worse spent doing that.
Roblox takes their 75% cut out of each sale then if you ever manage to accumulate the 100,000 Robux needed to cash out ($1000 worth for what Roblox sells it for) you only get $350. They're double dipping their cut. You should really watch the video it lays out the case very well.
If it's meant to be educational it shouldn't be marketing itself as a way to make money or charging kids to promote their app. It would have better ways to surface new applications instead of only showing the top N that already have to have over a thousand users.
If it's meant to be educational it shouldn't be marketing itself as a way to make money or charging kids to promote their app. It would have better ways to surface new applications instead of only showing the top N that already have to have over a thousand users.
To combine the numbers:
Roblox takes 75% of each sale. This means the developer needs to make 400,000 in Robux sales before the developer accumulates 100,000 Robux for cash withdrawal.
If 100,000 Robux is sold for $1,000, and 100,000 Robux only nets the developer $350, then the double dip gives Roblox a net 91.25% of developer sales. This excludes any applicable taxes or app store fees.
Roblox takes 75% of each sale. This means the developer needs to make 400,000 in Robux sales before the developer accumulates 100,000 Robux for cash withdrawal.
If 100,000 Robux is sold for $1,000, and 100,000 Robux only nets the developer $350, then the double dip gives Roblox a net 91.25% of developer sales. This excludes any applicable taxes or app store fees.
They don't combine like that, because the 75% already takes into account the double dip.
User spends $100 USD to buy 10000 robux. User buys item for 10000 robux in a game. Developer of game gets 7000 robux (dip #1). Developer of game withdraws to USD. 100000 robux = $350 (dip #2) so developer gets $24.5 USD.
Overall 24.5/100 = 24.5%.
In reality the numbers don't always come exactly to this, because robux can cost different amounts to buy depending on the amount, and there are PayPal/wire transfer fees when withdrawing.
User spends $100 USD to buy 10000 robux. User buys item for 10000 robux in a game. Developer of game gets 7000 robux (dip #1). Developer of game withdraws to USD. 100000 robux = $350 (dip #2) so developer gets $24.5 USD.
Overall 24.5/100 = 24.5%.
In reality the numbers don't always come exactly to this, because robux can cost different amounts to buy depending on the amount, and there are PayPal/wire transfer fees when withdrawing.
Thats only for one transacrion between users though.For every additional transaction the money goes through, the roblox takes even more of a cut.
The video mentioned you must also have a premium account at $5/month, so conservatively 7 months is another $35 down.
And presumably you have to pay for the premium account before you withdraw, so you are investing real cash for a chance of a payout?
And presumably you have to pay for the premium account before you withdraw, so you are investing real cash for a chance of a payout?
[deleted]
I’ll have to watch the video. It looks like there is some missing context in the article alone.
Still not sure how I feel. On the fence but leaning more good than bad. The thing I cant get past is “what else would a kid do with their time?” Even if its not a great way to make money, it seems like a better use of time than what I did. It just seems like it still provides a strong learning opportunity.
I think there may be a different argument about whether it exploits developers generally and not just kids.
Still not sure how I feel. On the fence but leaning more good than bad. The thing I cant get past is “what else would a kid do with their time?” Even if its not a great way to make money, it seems like a better use of time than what I did. It just seems like it still provides a strong learning opportunity.
I think there may be a different argument about whether it exploits developers generally and not just kids.
The argument you’re making could just as easily be applied to having kids “compete cleaning tables at a restaurant” where the winner for the day gets $10.
Once money is in the equation, all of the incentives change and it’s not about “learning opportunities” or fun.
Once money is in the equation, all of the incentives change and it’s not about “learning opportunities” or fun.
Play Minecraft?
Learn a programming language and write small games in Unity/Godot/whatever? Make levels in LittleBigPlanet/Dreams?
To be fair, those options can get exploitative too, but Roblox feels on another level. The only time I played Roblox, I distinctly remember thinking "the only people who would put money into this are kids who don't know any better".
Learn a programming language and write small games in Unity/Godot/whatever? Make levels in LittleBigPlanet/Dreams?
To be fair, those options can get exploitative too, but Roblox feels on another level. The only time I played Roblox, I distinctly remember thinking "the only people who would put money into this are kids who don't know any better".
It can be a "good" for the child, while still being exploitative. Take care of the exploitation, and don't destroy the "good" parts. I don't think it's an entirely binary situation.
[deleted]
[deleted]
The comparison to being paid in scrip you could only use in the company store is spot on.
Microsoft MakeCode (here's MakeCode Arcade[0], just one aspect) is a terrific gaming platform which teaches standard Typescript (using a Scratch-type interface). It doesn't offer monetization of any kind so they can honestly advertise for the pure creative, maker, and educational markets. And they do!
[0] https://arcade.makecode.com/
[0] https://arcade.makecode.com/
Yeah there’s definitely a cool niche there for an easy to use tool to build games in a way that deals with the mess of networking and servers that isn’t just siphoning all the money away from the users at every turn.
[deleted]
It sounds like Roblox does want there to be dedicated Roblox developers. I saw a clip from one of their conventions with someone, possibly the CEO, saying they envision companies of 100 people doing Roblox development
There are already studios like this, such as Uplift https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uplift_Games
That's 1 company, the biggest, saying they want to do that. Roblox makes a fortune off of everyone *failing" to reach that goal.
My son makes some games on Roblox and plays a lot.
He has a great time, he's not chasing $, he just wants to have fun. It works great for that.
As soon as you try to stand out and chase money, yeah it gets HARD. Just like streaming on YouTube... or just getting noticed online for your blog.
But what's the alternative here? That's a question of scale. Just not let kids even have a chance to make money?
He has a great time, he's not chasing $, he just wants to have fun. It works great for that.
As soon as you try to stand out and chase money, yeah it gets HARD. Just like streaming on YouTube... or just getting noticed online for your blog.
But what's the alternative here? That's a question of scale. Just not let kids even have a chance to make money?
The main complaint is they encourage kids to create games by emphasizing the revenue sharing aspect, without making clear how hard it is to derive any revenue at all from it.
Honestly I think it is a good learning experience.
I talked about it with my son.
"Yup there's lots of people making games, it's hard to make games as elaborate as everyone else."
And then you just make them for fun ...
The fact that kids try and fail at this is not a bad thing IMO.
If kids out there can't control themselves (they're kids...) I gotta wonder what if any parental involvement there is. Let's say they ban kids from creating content ... kid who can't control him/herself will just go make an 'adult' account too and do the same thing. Roblox can only do so much.
I talked about it with my son.
"Yup there's lots of people making games, it's hard to make games as elaborate as everyone else."
And then you just make them for fun ...
The fact that kids try and fail at this is not a bad thing IMO.
If kids out there can't control themselves (they're kids...) I gotta wonder what if any parental involvement there is. Let's say they ban kids from creating content ... kid who can't control him/herself will just go make an 'adult' account too and do the same thing. Roblox can only do so much.
I don't need to pay a third party to scam my children to teach them a lesson. I can do it myself.
> they encourage kids to create games by emphasizing the revenue sharing aspect
I disagree completely here - they encourage kids to create games by giving them an easy platform to create games and letting them play games other kids have created.
A kid who sees that other kids their age are able to actually make a video game is far more likely to want to learn to do that themselves.
I disagree completely here - they encourage kids to create games by giving them an easy platform to create games and letting them play games other kids have created.
A kid who sees that other kids their age are able to actually make a video game is far more likely to want to learn to do that themselves.
While I am sure many kids would be swayed without it, the potential to make "serious cash" is one of just three things they highlight about their platform on their creator page: https://www.roblox.com/create
A common practice used to encourage adults too
Whether I dis/agree with the practice or not, I find a separate standard for children to be disingenuous if we are talking about a common practice
Whether I dis/agree with the practice or not, I find a separate standard for children to be disingenuous if we are talking about a common practice
I think what the video presenter is suggesting is that:
1. Revenue could be shared more fairly. The money that Roblox is keeping from kids is going into corporate pockets. There's no way around that.
2. The advertising could be more honest. If it's only for devs to make money, then mention that part only under the dev pages where 1% of the people will find them. For everyone else, advertise playing and creating for fun.
1. Revenue could be shared more fairly. The money that Roblox is keeping from kids is going into corporate pockets. There's no way around that.
2. The advertising could be more honest. If it's only for devs to make money, then mention that part only under the dev pages where 1% of the people will find them. For everyone else, advertise playing and creating for fun.
[deleted]
My kids (and I) certainly don't see it as exploitation - they love learning to create games, and would be happy to do it even without any chance of payout.
I don't think the $1k minimum payout is crazy either, as the overhead of paying 10s of thousands of kids $11.32 would kill margins (leading to Robux having to take a higher %age). I'd have to think most kids are in the same boat as mine - if their games ever earn them any Robux, they'll turn around and spend those Robux in another game, because that's what they want to do with it anyway.
I don't think the $1k minimum payout is crazy either, as the overhead of paying 10s of thousands of kids $11.32 would kill margins (leading to Robux having to take a higher %age). I'd have to think most kids are in the same boat as mine - if their games ever earn them any Robux, they'll turn around and spend those Robux in another game, because that's what they want to do with it anyway.
Same with me. My kid makes Roblox games for her and her friends. It didn't take her long to realize that the odds of her making any money at all were very slim. In the meantime she gets to learn programming skills in a way that she finds fun.
I do feel a bit bad for the older kids that put real effort into it, but I don't see how it's much worse than trying to start a youtube or twitch channel and failing. At least with coding they're getting some valuable experience.
All that said, the way they sell "Robux" is absolutely predatory. We've had to have several talks about what is reasonable to spend money on. They even let you pay with Amazon. Payments via Amazon are on by default for Amazon accounts and don't require re-authentication, so a kid who clicks on a link in Roblox on a computer that has already authenticated with Amazon can drain their parent's account.
I do feel a bit bad for the older kids that put real effort into it, but I don't see how it's much worse than trying to start a youtube or twitch channel and failing. At least with coding they're getting some valuable experience.
All that said, the way they sell "Robux" is absolutely predatory. We've had to have several talks about what is reasonable to spend money on. They even let you pay with Amazon. Payments via Amazon are on by default for Amazon accounts and don't require re-authentication, so a kid who clicks on a link in Roblox on a computer that has already authenticated with Amazon can drain their parent's account.
It looks worse when that $1k becomes $350 because Roblox cashes out Robux at a 65% discount for itself after taking nearly 75% of every transaction.
Do you not see that there's a huge difference between $11.32 and $1000?
[deleted]
Upon further reflection, I think I've figured out why my kids and I don't see this as exploitative - they're not trying to get rich or famous.
I'm not trying to be mean to anyone, but if you look at all of the complaints through the filter of someone who wants to a) learn to make a video game, b) learn some programming, and c) make a cool game to share with his friends, then Roblox is a really fun, free, and easy way to do all of the above.
If your filter is a kid who a) wants to make a game that goes viral and earn a bunch of money off of it, then yeah - some of these are legit complaints.
I'm not trying to be mean to anyone, but if you look at all of the complaints through the filter of someone who wants to a) learn to make a video game, b) learn some programming, and c) make a cool game to share with his friends, then Roblox is a really fun, free, and easy way to do all of the above.
If your filter is a kid who a) wants to make a game that goes viral and earn a bunch of money off of it, then yeah - some of these are legit complaints.
Btw. did you really talk to your kids about this and really explained them the situation in a way they can appreciate it? For instance, take a large number of treats divide them on the table and show them who gets what for a game they built…
I think this would be a exceptionally great case to discuss business ethics and the perils of unregulated markets in a way that resonates with kids. Don’t leave this opportunity on the table!
I am really surprised by this attitude. I think most of the negative comments here are fueld by a perception of unfairness in general and not any drive to become famous or anything.
You basically seem to advocate for a world where it is ok for platform developers to double maybe tripple dip on transactions that only exist because of the hard work of others. I for myself don’t want to live in a world where this is par for the course. It should be called out and people should be made aware of injustice. It’s not about becoming rich or famous yourself but just realizing unfairness if you see it and ideally taking action on it so that the world may become a better place for all.
You basically seem to advocate for a world where it is ok for platform developers to double maybe tripple dip on transactions that only exist because of the hard work of others. I for myself don’t want to live in a world where this is par for the course. It should be called out and people should be made aware of injustice. It’s not about becoming rich or famous yourself but just realizing unfairness if you see it and ideally taking action on it so that the world may become a better place for all.
[deleted]
i mean, roblox still makes money off of the kid's effort and labor and work, and engineered the system such that they take large amount of cuts for that work.
I highly doubt the amount they take as a cut is necessary.
I highly doubt the amount they take as a cut is necessary.
Can’t you fix most of this problem by just buying the blox off market. Though discord and other backdoor channels?
This is no more exploitative than someone trying to make it big on Youtube, Twitch, or Spotify and gaining zero traction. If the content someone creates on these platforms doesn't capture an audience, the hosting platform doesn't generate any revenue and neither does the creator. It's completely free to produce the content (minus your time) and the platform hosts it for free, even though 99% of it never receives any views/plays/listens.
At the end of the day I think the only worthy argument is whether or not the revenue sharing arrangement is fair.
At the end of the day I think the only worthy argument is whether or not the revenue sharing arrangement is fair.
For adults, I agree. But this is squarely aimed at kids and they haven't got the life experience to see these problems coming or deal with them appropriately.
If it were aimed at adults, but kids wanted to try, too, like Youtube... I don't have as much problem with that. But the target audience of Roblox ads is kids and always has been.
It doesn't seem at all fair to trap kids into this ecosystem, sell them the things they need to get rich and famous, and then also give them a worse cut on their games than Steam, Apple, Google, etc.
If it were aimed at adults, but kids wanted to try, too, like Youtube... I don't have as much problem with that. But the target audience of Roblox ads is kids and always has been.
It doesn't seem at all fair to trap kids into this ecosystem, sell them the things they need to get rich and famous, and then also give them a worse cut on their games than Steam, Apple, Google, etc.
Honestly the only thing I find really disingenuous about this is the implication that it's realistic to get rich and famous on it, which is a quality shared by a lot of "creator" platforms. Also college.
What then? Just don't let them make money on the platform?
uh, yes? if your business model relies on exploiting children, you shouldn't be allowed to operate as a business.
or maybe don't pay kids whose work attracts people to your platform in your in-game digital currency. pay them, like, actual money that they've earned.
or maybe don't pay kids whose work attracts people to your platform in your in-game digital currency. pay them, like, actual money that they've earned.
I feel like we'd then have the same article:
"Adults can make money but they don't let kids who create content make any money!"
"Adults can make money but they don't let kids who create content make any money!"
That's how it works in minecraft right? Kids can design and build a minigame within the context of minecraft, but minecraft doesn't provide provide some minecraft diamonds to USD conversion service that allows players to bring real money into the game, or to cash out game money for real money. (Some third party servers might provide this, in violation of the Terms of Use.)
This seems like a fine state of affairs to me.
This seems like a fine state of affairs to me.
If you make money from the work of kids, you must be 100% fair with them. Giving them a worse cut than the parts of the game industry that are already under fire for not giving a big enough cut is not fair. Setting false expectations for them is not fair. And forcing them to earn $1000 before they can pull money out is not fair. Someone else mentioned that Second Life only requires $10 as their minimum.
But even if you're sure you're being 100% fair, you have to be incredibly clear with those kids about what's going on and how it works, and you should probably also make their parents very clear on it, too.
If you can't commit to that kind of fairness towards someone who can't legally sign contracts because the law recognizes that they don't have the life experience to do it fairly on their own, you shouldn't do it, and you definitely shouldn't base your business on it.
But even if you're sure you're being 100% fair, you have to be incredibly clear with those kids about what's going on and how it works, and you should probably also make their parents very clear on it, too.
If you can't commit to that kind of fairness towards someone who can't legally sign contracts because the law recognizes that they don't have the life experience to do it fairly on their own, you shouldn't do it, and you definitely shouldn't base your business on it.
>Giving them a worse cut than the parts of the game industry
What does the industry give indie devs whose games aren't popular?
Most of these kids are just sharing games with fiends on a platform.
If they want to go pro... welcome to the world / every platform where scale / getting attention is hard?
Better they have a learning experience now because they made a roblox game.
What does the industry give indie devs whose games aren't popular?
Most of these kids are just sharing games with fiends on a platform.
If they want to go pro... welcome to the world / every platform where scale / getting attention is hard?
Better they have a learning experience now because they made a roblox game.
Sure. I also don't think 11 year olds should be working in coal mines or farm fields either.
Although I can't prove it, I suspect there wouldn't be a lot of kids that would stop making games on roblox for an enjoyable day in the coal mine with their friends.
> For adults, I agree. But this is squarely aimed at kids
If it's manipulative of kids then it's manipulative of adults too.
If it's manipulative of kids then it's manipulative of adults too.
Eh, I think it's reasonable to have different expectations of children vs adults. After all, isn't there a reason why children can't sign legally binding contracts?
> I think it's reasonable to have different expectations of children vs adults.
Given the current state of stupidity in the US, I think there are a lot of children in adult bodies. No, I don't think it's reasonable to have different expectations for users.
Given the current state of stupidity in the US, I think there are a lot of children in adult bodies. No, I don't think it's reasonable to have different expectations for users.
> For adults, I agree. But this is squarely aimed at kids and they haven't got the life experience to see these problems coming or deal with them appropriately.
That's what parents are for.
That's what parents are for.
Well yeah, streaming services also suck for creators. That doesn't excuse the practices of Roblox.
However, the comparison isn't entirely fair for several reasons. First off, those platforms don't restrict releasing the content on other platforms. If I'm unhappy with Spotify, I can move my music to Soundcloud, Bandcamp, or even my own website. This isn't ideal, and doesn't excuse bad practices, but it is possible. Roblox games only work in Roblox, and if I want to move my games elsewhere, I have to rebuild it entirely from scratch.
Secondly, all of these services have various tools that enable discoverability, without requiring any payment. These tools are obviously not ideal, but I can become successful on Youtube without giving Google a single cent, and without advertising outside of the site. It's unlikely, but it's possible. Roblox requires you to spend money for any chance at discoverability, and even then there are no guarantees. Roblox doesn't even let you cash out unless you have an active subscription.
Finally, all of these other services pay me in actual money, not their own fun bucks. The conversion rate is also ridiculously bad for creators. According to the video linked in the article, you can only cash out when you have $1000 worth of Robux, which then only returns $350 back to you. Combine this terrible conversion rate with the fact that Roblox takes an additional cut of basically every transaction, and the actual percentage of money going to creators is potentially as low as 17%, which is way worse then any other service I know of.
So yeah, I would say this is more exploitative then someone trying to make it big on other platforms. And we should call out these bad practices specifically when we see them, instead of brushing it off under "all platforms are bad too."
However, the comparison isn't entirely fair for several reasons. First off, those platforms don't restrict releasing the content on other platforms. If I'm unhappy with Spotify, I can move my music to Soundcloud, Bandcamp, or even my own website. This isn't ideal, and doesn't excuse bad practices, but it is possible. Roblox games only work in Roblox, and if I want to move my games elsewhere, I have to rebuild it entirely from scratch.
Secondly, all of these services have various tools that enable discoverability, without requiring any payment. These tools are obviously not ideal, but I can become successful on Youtube without giving Google a single cent, and without advertising outside of the site. It's unlikely, but it's possible. Roblox requires you to spend money for any chance at discoverability, and even then there are no guarantees. Roblox doesn't even let you cash out unless you have an active subscription.
Finally, all of these other services pay me in actual money, not their own fun bucks. The conversion rate is also ridiculously bad for creators. According to the video linked in the article, you can only cash out when you have $1000 worth of Robux, which then only returns $350 back to you. Combine this terrible conversion rate with the fact that Roblox takes an additional cut of basically every transaction, and the actual percentage of money going to creators is potentially as low as 17%, which is way worse then any other service I know of.
So yeah, I would say this is more exploitative then someone trying to make it big on other platforms. And we should call out these bad practices specifically when we see them, instead of brushing it off under "all platforms are bad too."
> the hosting platform doesn't generate any revenue
That's false.
"YouTube will run ads on smaller creators' videos without paying them"
https://www.engadget.com/youtube-ads-on-small-creator-videos...
Requirement for YouTube partner is 1000 subscriptions.
In the case of Robox, they are still getting paid for all those small games that make less than $1000, and meanwhile the creators get scrip.
That's false.
"YouTube will run ads on smaller creators' videos without paying them"
https://www.engadget.com/youtube-ads-on-small-creator-videos...
Requirement for YouTube partner is 1000 subscriptions.
In the case of Robox, they are still getting paid for all those small games that make less than $1000, and meanwhile the creators get scrip.
Yeah, I'm reading this and thinking it is pretty similar to the situation on twitch. I'm the world's lamest twitch streamer in a category with paltry viewership, so it took me over 600 hours of streaming to get a payout[0] and I had to hit arbitrary milestones for affiliate in the first place. I have no idea how discovery even works on twitch, but I have to imagine it's the same as everywhere else: popular stuff gets more popular and everyone else languishes in obscurity. How else could it work, really?
[0] Twitch pays out at $100, if anyone didn't know.
[0] Twitch pays out at $100, if anyone didn't know.
Twitch isn’t amazing at it in total but it does recommend smaller streamers to people.
I think discoverability on YouTube is 100x easier than Twitch. I've been recommended videos with a few hundred or thousand views before. The equivalent on Twitch is a 0-10 viewer stream which I've literally never come across without it being through me actively looking for a niche game, through a raid, or through (ironically) finding their channel on YouTube which linked to their Twitch.
Twitch has a "Recommended Smaller Communities" section on their user frontpage now.
[deleted]
See Carmack's rebuttal: https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1428483898896535562
> I have been impressed by the number of real world economic and business issues that Roblox is exposing my younger son to, both in the experiences and the larger ecosystem. There is a lot of thinking in terms of effort, reward, and risk.
"You seem to be ignoring the thesis of the video. For the vast majority of their creators, their is very little reward, and mostly a lot of exploitative business preying on children."
> I am disagreeing with the thesis of the video. Roblox provides opportunities previously unavailable; it is up to the individuals to decide if they are worthwhile to invest time in.
If the most legendary game developer of all time thinks Roblox is fine, are you sure he's mistaken?
> I have been impressed by the number of real world economic and business issues that Roblox is exposing my younger son to, both in the experiences and the larger ecosystem. There is a lot of thinking in terms of effort, reward, and risk.
"You seem to be ignoring the thesis of the video. For the vast majority of their creators, their is very little reward, and mostly a lot of exploitative business preying on children."
> I am disagreeing with the thesis of the video. Roblox provides opportunities previously unavailable; it is up to the individuals to decide if they are worthwhile to invest time in.
If the most legendary game developer of all time thinks Roblox is fine, are you sure he's mistaken?
Carmack being a prolific game developer doesn't mean that he has special insight into any other issue, like corporations economically exploiting children.
He may have a point, but him being 'legendary' doesn't make his arguments any better (or worse).
He may have a point, but him being 'legendary' doesn't make his arguments any better (or worse).
I think him being a father gives him special insight into that issue. Most fathers are keenly aware when their children are being taken advantage of.
Most parents on this HN thread seem to agree.
Most parents on this HN thread seem to agree.
Quote from my friend, who is a mom:
> I'm honestly not a fan as a mom but it's a very fluid marketplace for games and gives people an opportunity to make their own video games and make money.
Given that this opportunity to make money scarcely exists in reality (it's equivalent to my opportunity to make money by starring in a Hollywood film as a random Seattle engineer), seems like parents don't really have a clue what's going on.
From my own experience from when I was a kid, it would seem to be true that parents don't have a clue what their children are actually exposed to on the internet, unless they take extreme and draconian measures.
Unfortunately, parents have a strong interest in protecting their image as that of a good parent, so it's rare for them to admit to not knowing such things.
> I'm honestly not a fan as a mom but it's a very fluid marketplace for games and gives people an opportunity to make their own video games and make money.
Given that this opportunity to make money scarcely exists in reality (it's equivalent to my opportunity to make money by starring in a Hollywood film as a random Seattle engineer), seems like parents don't really have a clue what's going on.
From my own experience from when I was a kid, it would seem to be true that parents don't have a clue what their children are actually exposed to on the internet, unless they take extreme and draconian measures.
Unfortunately, parents have a strong interest in protecting their image as that of a good parent, so it's rare for them to admit to not knowing such things.
> Roblox provides opportunities previously unavailable; it is up to the individuals to decide if they are worthwhile to invest time in.
Oh boy. I think we've all heard that many times before. Every exploitative business will use this line as its defense (see e.g. every controversy about employee/contractor status in the gig economy), so taken alone it isn't much of an argument.
For example, individuals can be mislead as to whether the opportunity is worthwhile to invest - with enough trickery and unsophisticated target group (e.g. Joe Random Uberdriver who never before calculated depreciation of their car), the business can exploit people for many years before they wisen up as a group.
Oh boy. I think we've all heard that many times before. Every exploitative business will use this line as its defense (see e.g. every controversy about employee/contractor status in the gig economy), so taken alone it isn't much of an argument.
For example, individuals can be mislead as to whether the opportunity is worthwhile to invest - with enough trickery and unsophisticated target group (e.g. Joe Random Uberdriver who never before calculated depreciation of their car), the business can exploit people for many years before they wisen up as a group.
I think it is important to note that its not the payment model itself that's the issue in those cases. It is instead the marketing that convinces people to engage with it in a way that is harmful / allows them to be exploited.
I would think contractor status can make sense for a small portion of people in the gig economy, but for a lot of people it would not.
I would think contractor status can make sense for a small portion of people in the gig economy, but for a lot of people it would not.
> If the most legendary game developer of all time thinks Roblox is fine, are you sure he's mistaken?
FWIW, he's the CTO of a 30% app store trying to also break into the Roblox business (their Metaverse talk/Facebook Horizon).
So rather than Roblox only taking 40% and giving 30% to Apple, Facebook will potentially be in position to take the full 70% (or more due to getting children to pay for ad spend) of the child labor.
FWIW, he's the CTO of a 30% app store trying to also break into the Roblox business (their Metaverse talk/Facebook Horizon).
So rather than Roblox only taking 40% and giving 30% to Apple, Facebook will potentially be in position to take the full 70% (or more due to getting children to pay for ad spend) of the child labor.
Carmack is a full time AI developer. He's working on AI in the most hardcore sense: aiming at full AGI. I've DM'ed with him for months about it. I was skeptical, and then his ideas turned out to be some of the most innovative I've seen.
When Carmack tweets something, it's because he believes what he's saying is true.
Searching for the most charitable interpretation of your argument, the only thing I can think of is "Maybe Carmack's view was contaminated by his time spent as CTO of Oculus." But he joined Oculus long before Facebook acquired it, and before the policies you mention. Carmack may be legendary, but he likely had no say in those policies.
When Carmack tweets something, it's because he believes what he's saying is true.
Searching for the most charitable interpretation of your argument, the only thing I can think of is "Maybe Carmack's view was contaminated by his time spent as CTO of Oculus." But he joined Oculus long before Facebook acquired it, and before the policies you mention. Carmack may be legendary, but he likely had no say in those policies.
> Carmack is a full time AI developer.
He's still simultaneously the CTO of Facebook's Oculus division, which runs their 30% app store and is building the Roblox-aesthetic Facebook Horizon "metaverse":
https://techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Facebook-W...
https://roadtovrlive-5ea0.kxcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/...
https://roadtovrlive-5ea0.kxcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/...
He's separated out his AI work as his own thing.
He's still simultaneously the CTO of Facebook's Oculus division, which runs their 30% app store and is building the Roblox-aesthetic Facebook Horizon "metaverse":
https://techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Facebook-W...
https://roadtovrlive-5ea0.kxcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/...
https://roadtovrlive-5ea0.kxcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/...
He's separated out his AI work as his own thing.
I don’t think Oculus is courting amateur kiddie devs.
> thinks Roblox is fine
I don't think he's claiming it's not exploitative behavior, but rather values the experience for the real world lessons.
I don't think he's claiming it's not exploitative behavior, but rather values the experience for the real world lessons.
Yeah, the only way I think Roblox could useful for kids is as a case study for how predatory game companies try to take your money.
For the creative side, there are other options. Play Minecraft, Trackmania and Super Mario Maker.
For the creative side, there are other options. Play Minecraft, Trackmania and Super Mario Maker.
Aren’t most modern game developers notoriously exploitative of their adult workers? And, increasingly, their users of all ages? Perhaps a “legendary” game developer isn’t the best person to weigh in on whether Roblox is “fine” or exploitative.
> If the most legendary game developer of all time thinks Roblox is fine, are you sure he's mistaken?
Isn't this an argument from authority? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
Furthermore, the video made the argument that Roblox tries to mislead kids into thinking they can make money. In other words, an individual might be wrong in thinking the opportunities are worth investing time in due to the manipulative practices of Roblox.
Isn't this an argument from authority? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
Furthermore, the video made the argument that Roblox tries to mislead kids into thinking they can make money. In other words, an individual might be wrong in thinking the opportunities are worth investing time in due to the manipulative practices of Roblox.
It is. And you're right to be skeptical of such arguments.
But such arguments also happen all the time. For example, if you join a company as a junior developer, most people would trust an existing senior developer.
I was about to write "I think it's fine to mislead kids into thinking they can make money." Then I reconsidered.
After reconsidering, I think it's fine to mislead kids into thinking they can make money. Lemonade stands and lawnmowing for neighbors are examples of this. They may make a little bit, but unless they're exceptionally lucky, no one would be under any illusions that it would become their full time profession.
But such arguments also happen all the time. For example, if you join a company as a junior developer, most people would trust an existing senior developer.
I was about to write "I think it's fine to mislead kids into thinking they can make money." Then I reconsidered.
After reconsidering, I think it's fine to mislead kids into thinking they can make money. Lemonade stands and lawnmowing for neighbors are examples of this. They may make a little bit, but unless they're exceptionally lucky, no one would be under any illusions that it would become their full time profession.
But he is CTO of a company trying to become Roblox which takes half the money from kids the article/video talks about, and he's CTO of a 30% app store which takes the other half of the money from kids the article/video talks about.
Why does his C-programming ability have more weight than his obvious conflict of interest weighing in here? He may be being geniune, but since he works in this exact area, it is too tainted by that to take at face value or especially to take on authority.
Why does his C-programming ability have more weight than his obvious conflict of interest weighing in here? He may be being geniune, but since he works in this exact area, it is too tainted by that to take at face value or especially to take on authority.
Lawnmowing for a neighbor takes about an hour and earns maybe $10. Making a Roblox game takes perhaps 100 hours and is almost certainly going to result in earning $0 for everyone except the Roblox Corporation.
Ditto for learning the violin. (In this case, you learn Lua.)
But is it okay for a company to mislead kids into thinking that learning the violin will make them money?
An argument from authority isn't inherently a fallacy, as your own wikipedia article mentions.
But, like you, I do think it is inherently a flag that suggests other inputs are necessary. And that all opinions that solely reference the authority are equally lower weighted until additional inputs are found to match, or further negate.
But, like you, I do think it is inherently a flag that suggests other inputs are necessary. And that all opinions that solely reference the authority are equally lower weighted until additional inputs are found to match, or further negate.
> If the most legendary game developer of all time thinks Roblox is fine, are you sure he's mistaken?
If he was the most legendary game _designer_ sure, but in that area he hasn't been very relevant in a while, as a programmer I don't see what special insight he has.
He seems like a nice guy and he is obviously one of the best developer ever, but I don't get the near cult he has
If he was the most legendary game _designer_ sure, but in that area he hasn't been very relevant in a while, as a programmer I don't see what special insight he has.
He seems like a nice guy and he is obviously one of the best developer ever, but I don't get the near cult he has
I was surprised how grounded he was. It’s pretty much the opposite of a cult.
When you talk with him about a technical idea, you come away feeling that whatever Carmack said, it was plausible. So you start questioning your own assumptions.
I’ve learned to trust his thinking. It doesn’t mean that I don’t think for myself. Quite the opposite; I don’t think anyone else in the AI scene insisted to him that it was crucial to have a loss function.
But in matters like this, where he’s clearly given it more thought than I have (see tweet) and has more experience than I have (see son), I am perfectly content to outsource my thinking to him.
I’ll wager you $500 he’s right. (The problem with such wagers is that it’s hard to define the terms precisely. But, if it were possible to make it precise the way a mathematics formula is precise, I would happily bet you the $500.)
When you talk with him about a technical idea, you come away feeling that whatever Carmack said, it was plausible. So you start questioning your own assumptions.
I’ve learned to trust his thinking. It doesn’t mean that I don’t think for myself. Quite the opposite; I don’t think anyone else in the AI scene insisted to him that it was crucial to have a loss function.
But in matters like this, where he’s clearly given it more thought than I have (see tweet) and has more experience than I have (see son), I am perfectly content to outsource my thinking to him.
I’ll wager you $500 he’s right. (The problem with such wagers is that it’s hard to define the terms precisely. But, if it were possible to make it precise the way a mathematics formula is precise, I would happily bet you the $500.)
Off-topic, but has he (or anyone else) written more on getting rid of loss functions in ML?
I'm not really convinced by "John Carmack doesn't think it's a bad deal, so it's probably ok". He might very well be an incredibly talented game developer, but he also hasn't been in the position of being unknown in the space since the 90s. He also isn't an economist. However, I do think he makes a good point about accessibility. I also think that similar arguments are commonly used to defend MLM companies, which many rightfully still dislike.
I suspect he's more so talking from his position/experience as (1) a father, and (2) someone who launched his own (incredibly successful) business at a very young age.
my son (not yet 14yo) has learnt to write a few games in Roblox
he's learnt Lua, object orientated programing client side/ server side distributed programing (and how to optimse the speed)
he's also learnt that the people who run the platform will screw you over in many different ways (he's learnt a few tricks to semi counter this)
he's learnt that advertising can be useless and costly,
learnt people are extremely fickle, there's a far amount of people who have money to throw around
learnt that doing good graphics is harder than it seems. (also learnt how to use blender)
also that game dynamics and subtile changes can have big real world changes to peoples experiances
also that UI and UX are important
also to train other (kids) how to program - for money
I'd say as a learning platform it has been fantastic, he's not made much real money, but has earned a far amount of robuks (platforms currency) that's he's spent in game
he's learnt Lua, object orientated programing client side/ server side distributed programing (and how to optimse the speed)
he's also learnt that the people who run the platform will screw you over in many different ways (he's learnt a few tricks to semi counter this)
he's learnt that advertising can be useless and costly,
learnt people are extremely fickle, there's a far amount of people who have money to throw around
learnt that doing good graphics is harder than it seems. (also learnt how to use blender)
also that game dynamics and subtile changes can have big real world changes to peoples experiances
also that UI and UX are important
also to train other (kids) how to program - for money
I'd say as a learning platform it has been fantastic, he's not made much real money, but has earned a far amount of robuks (platforms currency) that's he's spent in game
I have no experience of Roblox development, but if it teaches transferable skills to 'real' programming then it's still probably a net good.
A lot of people seem to be missing the point - Roblox is motivated to make money from kids. In pursuit of making money they are likely to ignore harms associated to their business model.
Yes, this is how business works, but this is also why child labor laws exist. Roblox is treading a fine line between game development for fun and game development for work.
Yes, this is how business works, but this is also why child labor laws exist. Roblox is treading a fine line between game development for fun and game development for work.
Hard disagree.
The absurd vast majority of people will never make any money via Roblox, or any of the major app stores for that matter. I have a few apps on both Google Play and the App Store.
I'm never going to see a dime. If anything I like that Roblox is encouraging kids to learn game development, later on they can always move on to Unity or Godot( I'm not really an Unreal fan since the editor doesn't run well on my computer). Then they can also enjoy making no money on Steam ! It's very very rare for indie game devs to make money !!
The absurd vast majority of people will never make any money via Roblox, or any of the major app stores for that matter. I have a few apps on both Google Play and the App Store.
I'm never going to see a dime. If anything I like that Roblox is encouraging kids to learn game development, later on they can always move on to Unity or Godot( I'm not really an Unreal fan since the editor doesn't run well on my computer). Then they can also enjoy making no money on Steam ! It's very very rare for indie game devs to make money !!
These allegations, if true, are terrible, and Roblox should address them.
That said, maybe if these young developers learn first hand why digital sharecropping is bad at an early age they can avoid being chewed up and spit out by the "AAA" game development machine and instead focus on creating and promoting games on a platform they have control over.
That said, maybe if these young developers learn first hand why digital sharecropping is bad at an early age they can avoid being chewed up and spit out by the "AAA" game development machine and instead focus on creating and promoting games on a platform they have control over.
I think it is a terrible waste if even one kid with a bright future developing (for example) indie games is traumatized by this stuff and ends up pushing spreadsheets or designing webpages at an ad firm instead.
On the other hand it may turn a child onto development when they would have normally defaulted into some kind of boring pencil pushing position. Or it may encourage the kids to go into open source if they're not getting paid anyway.
Sort of orthogonal, but a perhaps culturally telling anecdote: a few months ago I was actively looking for a new job, and got a cold email from a technical recruiter from Roblox (via linkedin). I was curious, so set up a time to call, he asked for me to submit my cv (which is 90% things you could see on my linkedin, but sure, whatever) through a upload page on some recruiting site of their. Within minutes of submitting the cv, I got a rejection email from them, even though I had already scheduled the call. I figured it was an error, but nope, crickets when the time for the call came around.
Its not really surprising, this is a platform designed solely for the purpose of keeping kids glued to their screens and spending money. And they are excellent at it. My kids are obsessed with it to the point where I have been planning a complete ban on gaming for a couple weeks to try and break the addiction. I know several (4) other families who's kids are going through the same thing. My kids are constantly asking for money as well to buy things in game, constantly to the point that it really reminds me of a drug addiction.
I feel like any criticism that centered around “it’s difficult to be in the top 200” is just ridiculous and sounds Like it’s just sour grapes from someone who failed at making something good and can’t accept that.
There is nothing any platform can do to have more items in their top 200. That’s just not possible. It’s not a problem in the platform that you didn’t make it to the top 200.
There is nothing any platform can do to have more items in their top 200. That’s just not possible. It’s not a problem in the platform that you didn’t make it to the top 200.
It's all fun and games till people start talking about money and exploitation.
Back in my day, we made mods for fun, and then we used the skills we learned to get jobs doing something corporate.
Back in my day, we made mods for fun, and then we used the skills we learned to get jobs doing something corporate.
>Back in my day, we made mods for fun, and then we used the skills we learned to get jobs doing something corporate.
Back in your day, ID etc weren't profiting off of the mods you made. They were shared freely in other fan spaces.
Apples, oranges.
Back in your day, ID etc weren't profiting off of the mods you made. They were shared freely in other fan spaces.
Apples, oranges.
I'm pretty sure that Valve made quite the pretty penny off of just user made maps alone for CS Source?
"Dude check out this crazy game, you can SURF around, kill people, and level up your character for crazy new powers" was the reason I bought CS Source after seeing it at a friends house...
"Dude check out this crazy game, you can SURF around, kill people, and level up your character for crazy new powers" was the reason I bought CS Source after seeing it at a friends house...
What I find most disturbing about this is the possibility to use real money to promote the games. Due to the misrepresentation of the chances of success this turns the platform into a gambling den for ten year olds.
Wonder what the IRS would think of these earnings. If someone earns $5,000 worth of Robux but spends it all in Roblox rather than ever converting it to currency, is that taxable income? Or would it be like S&H Green Stamps? While there likely aren't many who make games that earn that much or whatever the IRS's threshold is, this is the kind of edge case that ends up making headlines when (if) the IRS comes sniffing around.
An 11 year old is having trouble earning a living as an independent game developer?
If you're interested in more info about the platform dynamics of Roblox, I found _So You Want to Compete with Roblox_[1] to be informative.
1. https://www.fortressofdoors.com/so-you-want-to-compete-with-...
1. https://www.fortressofdoors.com/so-you-want-to-compete-with-...
This probably is exploitative at some level. Although for my son, he has made a handful of very low budget games. And he's gotten paid in Robux for them. He was actually pleasantly surprised when he got his first payout. Probably the equivalent of a few dollars.
While he can't cash out his Robux, it turns out not to be so bad for him since he likes Robux. On his last birthday his biggest as was for Robux.
As far as gaming development platforms, it is probably the best I've used. I'm not a pro game developer, so I've used simple stuff like Unity. But I have found Roblox to be a really easy platform to get started with.
While he can't cash out his Robux, it turns out not to be so bad for him since he likes Robux. On his last birthday his biggest as was for Robux.
As far as gaming development platforms, it is probably the best I've used. I'm not a pro game developer, so I've used simple stuff like Unity. But I have found Roblox to be a really easy platform to get started with.
they should all go to sandbox.
https://www.sandbox.game/en/
Play, Create, Own, and Govern a virtual world made by players
If they were forced to change, I feel like the most likely outcome would be to remove the chance of renumeration for young developers, to sidestep any possible legal implications altogether. To turn experience-making, for kids at least, into a purely hobby effort. Maybe that's not bad, but I figure the same negative pressures would still exist, for the most part.
It would be interesting to see the company's reaction to a completely free, hobby Experience becoming the most played (and unpaid) game on the platform. It's unlikely, but fun to imagine.
It would be interesting to see the company's reaction to a completely free, hobby Experience becoming the most played (and unpaid) game on the platform. It's unlikely, but fun to imagine.
As a teen I spent many hours making games in Klik and Play and mods for Id Software games. Roblox and Minecraft both enable kids to craft experiences for and with friends. I think Roblox's market, messaging, and cut set it apart. If it didn't sell the dream of making money and maintain such a high bar to get money out and get discovered then it wouldn't be so exploitive.
I don't feel exploited by my time with other game toolkits because the expectations and outcomes were clearer.
I don't feel exploited by my time with other game toolkits because the expectations and outcomes were clearer.
[deleted]
I'm with others here in that this - while an extreme example - is just another version of common revenue-sharing that happens on pretty much all online creation platforms where the user isn't responsible for hosting the content themselves.
I think it's a bit ludicrous that the company is pushing that as a marketing point towards children, that the payout-threshold is so high, and that they take multiple cuts of that payout, but at the end of the day; aren't all monetized products aimed at children kind of a scam built on exploiting people who can't recognize they're being exploited?
Kind of egregious, but also just the same principle as many other platforms like Twitch, YouTube, Spotify, Medium, Google, etc.
I think it's a bit ludicrous that the company is pushing that as a marketing point towards children, that the payout-threshold is so high, and that they take multiple cuts of that payout, but at the end of the day; aren't all monetized products aimed at children kind of a scam built on exploiting people who can't recognize they're being exploited?
Kind of egregious, but also just the same principle as many other platforms like Twitch, YouTube, Spotify, Medium, Google, etc.
I mean is a shit model but as long as you do all your transactions off marketplace it reduces fees significantly
Not sure what Roblox is in first place. An integrated game engine and hosting site?
That's precisely what it is. The game animations are fairly simple, but you can build a world and write fairly sophisticated game elements/rules/etc with Lua, and the kids actually seem to like the cartoonish models.
Once you write a game or create a world, you can click and publish it for anyone to join.
Once you write a game or create a world, you can click and publish it for anyone to join.
Think Steam.
But you can jump from game to game quickly.
Many of the games are similar-ish to popular games but the barrier to entry is low, share assets, games are easy to jump in and out of together with your friends.
But you can jump from game to game quickly.
Many of the games are similar-ish to popular games but the barrier to entry is low, share assets, games are easy to jump in and out of together with your friends.
Yep. It's surprisingly unknown outside the target demographic, despite being one of the most highly valued gaming properties around.
It is a metaverse filled with games for kids. Kind of minecraft-like in quality, but more like an arcade than a lego set.
Second Life for kids.
It is basically that. With freemium style monetization, cooldown periods, timed pop ups, consumable items (purchase in the store) and all,
My niece was about 300 dollars into this game before my sister got involved. She was using 'oh get me itunes gift cards' from relatives so mom would not notice. She was using all of the tools of an addicted person to use that game. Her sister on the other hand got bored with it and gave up on it.
My niece was about 300 dollars into this game before my sister got involved. She was using 'oh get me itunes gift cards' from relatives so mom would not notice. She was using all of the tools of an addicted person to use that game. Her sister on the other hand got bored with it and gave up on it.
With a really good physics engine that can simulate complicated mechanical contraptions https://youtu.be/P-WP1yMOkc4
A really messy and ugly game that lets people make & distribute mods for it, somehow popular with children, despite being a complete mess.
I haven't played roblox and know relatively little about it, but my guess would be that it is popular with children because it has a low barrier to entry. Sort of like what Flash did for young animators.
I played Dreams on the PS4 before I had heard of Roblox, and when I first heard about it I thought "oh wow it's probably like Dreams but for PC!"
I was sorely disappointed - I'm as perplexed as you are how they became so successful. It is indeed a total mess.
I was sorely disappointed - I'm as perplexed as you are how they became so successful. It is indeed a total mess.
Kids love the total mess! As an adult I don't see the appeal but I can understand why kids like it. Most of the complaints here about Roblox and revenue sharing, etc, completely miss the point: Roblox is not Steam; it's a playground.
It's the epitome of what people have come to expect from Silicon Valley bro culture to exploit child programmers instead of paying them cash.
Roblox developer business model should be renamed Dickensian Development.
Roblox developer business model should be renamed Dickensian Development.
Cut is high, something like 91.25%. That should probably change. All the rest is whinging.
articles like this would do better to actually spell things out.
What is the cut. They say it's worse than other platforms, but nothing stops them from actually saying what it is.
edit: the cut roblox takes for themselves is 30% at transaction time, and 65% at withdrawal time.
What is the cut. They say it's worse than other platforms, but nothing stops them from actually saying what it is.
edit: the cut roblox takes for themselves is 30% at transaction time, and 65% at withdrawal time.
some people are jealous they didn't buy the IPO when it was cheap, some FOMO in hopes they can buy some now lol
i am omniscient
i am omniscient
[deleted]
Normally we'd change the URL to the original source but I think most HN readers probably prefer to read a summary even if the article is cribbed.