5 ms·

Too bad they exploit young game developers by taking a 75.5% cut of their earnings. Big yikes of a red flag for me. https://www.nme.com/news/gaming-news/roblox-

Too bad they exploit young game developers by taking a 75.5% cut of their earnings. Big yikes of a red flag for me. https://www.nme.com/news/gaming-news/roblox-is-allegedly-exploiting-young-game-developers-3024548 https://www.nme.com/news/gaming-news/roblox-is-allegedly-exp...

nostrebored 5y ago
The idea that these children would otherwise be making their own games is knowingly, generally wrong.
loceng 5y ago
The solution is creating a competing platform and offering a better cut. You up for the task? Edit to add: lazy people downvote.
badcc 5y ago
This % includes cost of all game server hosting, databases, memory stores, etc. even with millions of concurrents, app store fees, etc. All included in that number. Developer gets effectively pure profit for the sole cost of programming/designing a great game. Taught me how to program, & changed my entire future. Disclosure: My game is one of most popular on the platform.
- ygjb 5y ago
  And that's a reasonable decision for an adult to make, and if they were targeting an adult developer community. I don't think anyone objects to adults making that choice over say, using Unity or Unreal, and targeting other platforms. In practice, explaining to my son who is growing into an avid developer why I won't a) help him build on Roblox, or b) fund his objectives of advertising and promoting his work in Roblox (by spending Roblox company scrip) on the platform has necessitated helping him to learn and understand what exploitation means and how to recognize it. It's a learning experience for him, and a challenging issue for me as a technically proficient and financially literate parent who actually owns and run businesses related to intellectual property. It's got to be much more painful for parents who lack in any of those three areas.
  - RussianCow 5y ago
    Are you really suggesting that Roblox's cut should be lower purely because the target market is children? Why? If anything, the fact that a kid can code a game in a high-level environment and immediately start making money—without any of the normal challenges of setting up infrastructure, let alone marketing and discovery—is amazing, and a feat for which Roblox should definitely be rewarded. In any case, what's the alternative? To teach your son how to build the game from scratch in Unity, spin up a server infrastructure that won't crumble with more than a few concurrent players (not to mention the cash required for this), figure out distribution, and then actually get people to find and play the game? That seems quite unreasonable for most children/parents. If this were easy, a competitor would have come in and offered the same service with significantly lower fees.
    - adgjlsfhk1 5y ago
      The problem is that robolox essentially lies to kids (by omission) in an attempt to get free labor out of them.
      - RussianCow 5y ago
        Yes, I agree that the deception is a problem, although I admit I'm not well versed in the issue. (I'm watching the documentary linked elsewhere now.) But the original claim was that they were exploiting young developers by taking a big cut of revenues, which I disagree with.
  - noobhacker 5y ago
    Does your son have other alternatives to learn programming and make money other than Roblox? If there are, then it's a great lesson about looking outside of one's immediate circumstance and striving towards something better.
  - lolinder 5y ago
    > And that's a reasonable decision for an adult to make, and if they were targeting an adult developer community. If it's a reasonable decision for an adult to make because the trade-offs might be worth it, doesn't that mean that it would also be reasonable for a child to make the same decision for the same reason? It's either exploitative or it isn't, the age of the developer doesn't alter the trade-offs involved.
- erwincoumans 5y ago
  Very cool, the Jailbreak creator! Do such popular games earn enough to be able to retire? (although you wouldn't actually retire, since working is more fun)
  - badcc 5y ago
    Pretty darn cool hearing from you! But yes, you're correct on both points :)
    - erwincoumans 5y ago
      Congrats, I haven't made it that far yet, buy enjoy working anyway.
DerArzt 5y ago
To add, there is a nice documentary here[1] which also has a followup[2] that show even more of the issue at hand. Kids making games and only getting 24.5% of the profit is one thing, but everything else that Roblox does is much worse. [1] https://youtu.be/_gXlauRB1EQ https://youtu.be/_gXlauRB1EQ [2] https://youtu.be/vTMF6xEiAaY https://youtu.be/vTMF6xEiAaY
- Qualadore 5y ago
  The 24.5% cut is fine, you have to consider the 30% app store fees for a majority mobile playerbase, all hosting is free, moderation is a major expense, and engine and platform development. Successful games subsidize everyone else, which is not comparable to Steam or anything else. Collectible items are fine and can't be exchanged for USD, Roblox can't arbitrate developer disputes, "black markets" are an extremely tiny niche. A lot of misinformation. It's annoying to see these videos brought up every single time Roblox is mentioned anywhere for these reasons. Part of the blame lies with Roblox for one of the worst PR responses I have seen in tech, I suppose.
  - brimble 5y ago
    > The 24.5% cut is fine, you have to consider the 30% app store fees for a majority mobile playerbase, all hosting is free, moderation is a major expense, and engine and platform development. You have successfully made the case for a 45% fee and being considered approximately normal, or a 60% fee and being considered pretty high still. 75+% is crazy.
    - Qualadore 5y ago
      I can't think of any other platform with comparable expenses. Traditional game engines have the R&D component, but not moderation, developer services, or subsidizing games that don't succeed. It helps that seriously marketing a Roblox game costs < $1k USD always, usually < $200 USD. It's not easy to generate a loss, even when including production costs. That's the tradeoff.
    - RussianCow 5y ago
breakfastduck 5y ago
Or how about giving a free platform to get into games development for young people that otherwise wouldn't have become interested.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
munk-a 5y ago
No matter what the cut is I think there are some legitimate social questions to ask about whether want young people to be potentially exposed to economic pressure to earn or whether we'd rather push back aggressively against youth monetization to preserve a childhood where, ideally, children get to play. I know there are lots of child actors and plenty of household situations that make enjoying childhood difficult for many youths - but just because we're already bad at a thing doesn't mean we should let it get worse. Child labour laws were some of the first steps of regulation in the industrial revolution because inflation works in such a way where opening the door up to child labour can put significant financial pressure on families that choose not to participate when demand adjusts to that participation being normal.
Aunche 5y ago
By that logic, Dreams is "exploiting" developers by taking a 100% cut of their earnings. Making money isn't the point of either of these platforms.
flippinburgers 5y ago
I am naive about the reality on the ground when it comes to this issue, but doesn't this hinge on transparency? If they can show they are covering costs + the going market rate, which seems to be 30% (at best), then wouldn't it be reasonable? So is a 45% cut for infra ok or not seems to be the question.
perihelions 5y ago
More egregiously, they're (per your article) manipulating kids into buying real ads for their creations, with the false promise that "you could get rich -- if you pay us". >"As there are no discoverability tools, users are only able to see a tiny selection of the millions of experiences available. One of the ways boost to discoverability is to pay to advertise on the platform using its virtual currency, Robux." (Note that this "virtual" currency is real money, bidirectionally exchangeable with USD). The sales pitch is "get rich fast": >"Under the platform’s ‘Create’ tab, it sells the idea that users can “make anything”, “reach millions of players”, and “earn serious cash”, while its official tutorials and support website both “assume” they are looking for help with monetisation." I agree that this doesn't really look like a labor issue. That's distracting and contentious tangent; it's easier to just label this as a kind of consumer exploitation. (Most of the people involved aren't earning money -- but they are all paying money). It's a scam either way.
tptacek 5y ago
Again, as across-thread: this is a tangent unrelated to the actual story, which is interesting for reasons having nothing at all to do with Roblox (I'll never use it, but operating HashiStack at this scale is intensely relevant to me). We need to be careful with tangents like this, because they're easier for people to comment on than the vagaries of Raft and Go synchronization primitives, and --- as you can see here --- they quickly drown out the on-topic comments.

nostrebored 5y ago

The idea that these children would otherwise be making their own games is knowingly, generally wrong.

loceng 5y ago

The solution is creating a competing platform and offering a better cut. You up for the task? Edit to add: lazy people downvote.

badcc 5y ago

This % includes cost of all game server hosting, databases, memory stores, etc. even with millions of concurrents, app store fees, etc. All included in that number. Developer gets effectively pure profit for the sole cost of programming/designing a great game. Taught me how to program, & changed my entire future. Disclosure: My game is one of most popular on the platform.

ygjb 5y ago
And that's a reasonable decision for an adult to make, and if they were targeting an adult developer community. I don't think anyone objects to adults making that choice over say, using Unity or Unreal, and targeting other platforms. In practice, explaining to my son who is growing into an avid developer why I won't a) help him build on Roblox, or b) fund his objectives of advertising and promoting his work in Roblox (by spending Roblox company scrip) on the platform has necessitated helping him to learn and understand what exploitation means and how to recognize it. It's a learning experience for him, and a challenging issue for me as a technically proficient and financially literate parent who actually owns and run businesses related to intellectual property. It's got to be much more painful for parents who lack in any of those three areas.
- RussianCow 5y ago
  Are you really suggesting that Roblox's cut should be lower purely because the target market is children? Why? If anything, the fact that a kid can code a game in a high-level environment and immediately start making money—without any of the normal challenges of setting up infrastructure, let alone marketing and discovery—is amazing, and a feat for which Roblox should definitely be rewarded. In any case, what's the alternative? To teach your son how to build the game from scratch in Unity, spin up a server infrastructure that won't crumble with more than a few concurrent players (not to mention the cash required for this), figure out distribution, and then actually get people to find and play the game? That seems quite unreasonable for most children/parents. If this were easy, a competitor would have come in and offered the same service with significantly lower fees.
  - adgjlsfhk1 5y ago
    The problem is that robolox essentially lies to kids (by omission) in an attempt to get free labor out of them.
    - RussianCow 5y ago
      Yes, I agree that the deception is a problem, although I admit I'm not well versed in the issue. (I'm watching the documentary linked elsewhere now.) But the original claim was that they were exploiting young developers by taking a big cut of revenues, which I disagree with.
- noobhacker 5y ago
  Does your son have other alternatives to learn programming and make money other than Roblox? If there are, then it's a great lesson about looking outside of one's immediate circumstance and striving towards something better.
- lolinder 5y ago
  > And that's a reasonable decision for an adult to make, and if they were targeting an adult developer community. If it's a reasonable decision for an adult to make because the trade-offs might be worth it, doesn't that mean that it would also be reasonable for a child to make the same decision for the same reason? It's either exploitative or it isn't, the age of the developer doesn't alter the trade-offs involved.
erwincoumans 5y ago
Very cool, the Jailbreak creator! Do such popular games earn enough to be able to retire? (although you wouldn't actually retire, since working is more fun)
- badcc 5y ago
  Pretty darn cool hearing from you! But yes, you're correct on both points :)
  - erwincoumans 5y ago
    Congrats, I haven't made it that far yet, buy enjoy working anyway.

DerArzt 5y ago

To add, there is a nice documentary here[1] which also has a followup[2] that show even more of the issue at hand. Kids making games and only getting 24.5% of the profit is one thing, but everything else that Roblox does is much worse. [1] https://youtu.be/_gXlauRB1EQ https://youtu.be/_gXlauRB1EQ [2] https://youtu.be/vTMF6xEiAaY https://youtu.be/vTMF6xEiAaY

Qualadore 5y ago
The 24.5% cut is fine, you have to consider the 30% app store fees for a majority mobile playerbase, all hosting is free, moderation is a major expense, and engine and platform development. Successful games subsidize everyone else, which is not comparable to Steam or anything else. Collectible items are fine and can't be exchanged for USD, Roblox can't arbitrate developer disputes, "black markets" are an extremely tiny niche. A lot of misinformation. It's annoying to see these videos brought up every single time Roblox is mentioned anywhere for these reasons. Part of the blame lies with Roblox for one of the worst PR responses I have seen in tech, I suppose.
- brimble 5y ago
  > The 24.5% cut is fine, you have to consider the 30% app store fees for a majority mobile playerbase, all hosting is free, moderation is a major expense, and engine and platform development. You have successfully made the case for a 45% fee and being considered approximately normal, or a 60% fee and being considered pretty high still. 75+% is crazy.
  - Qualadore 5y ago
    I can't think of any other platform with comparable expenses. Traditional game engines have the R&D component, but not moderation, developer services, or subsidizing games that don't succeed. It helps that seriously marketing a Roblox game costs < $1k USD always, usually < $200 USD. It's not easy to generate a loss, even when including production costs. That's the tradeoff.
  - RussianCow 5y ago

breakfastduck 5y ago

Or how about giving a free platform to get into games development for young people that otherwise wouldn't have become interested.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

munk-a 5y ago

No matter what the cut is I think there are some legitimate social questions to ask about whether want young people to be potentially exposed to economic pressure to earn or whether we'd rather push back aggressively against youth monetization to preserve a childhood where, ideally, children get to play. I know there are lots of child actors and plenty of household situations that make enjoying childhood difficult for many youths - but just because we're already bad at a thing doesn't mean we should let it get worse. Child labour laws were some of the first steps of regulation in the industrial revolution because inflation works in such a way where opening the door up to child labour can put significant financial pressure on families that choose not to participate when demand adjusts to that participation being normal.

Aunche 5y ago

By that logic, Dreams is "exploiting" developers by taking a 100% cut of their earnings. Making money isn't the point of either of these platforms.

flippinburgers 5y ago

I am naive about the reality on the ground when it comes to this issue, but doesn't this hinge on transparency? If they can show they are covering costs + the going market rate, which seems to be 30% (at best), then wouldn't it be reasonable? So is a 45% cut for infra ok or not seems to be the question.

perihelions 5y ago

More egregiously, they're (per your article) manipulating kids into buying real ads for their creations, with the false promise that "you could get rich -- if you pay us". >"As there are no discoverability tools, users are only able to see a tiny selection of the millions of experiences available. One of the ways boost to discoverability is to pay to advertise on the platform using its virtual currency, Robux." (Note that this "virtual" currency is real money, bidirectionally exchangeable with USD). The sales pitch is "get rich fast": >"Under the platform’s ‘Create’ tab, it sells the idea that users can “make anything”, “reach millions of players”, and “earn serious cash”, while its official tutorials and support website both “assume” they are looking for help with monetisation." I agree that this doesn't really look like a labor issue. That's distracting and contentious tangent; it's easier to just label this as a kind of consumer exploitation. (Most of the people involved aren't earning money -- but they are all paying money). It's a scam either way.

tptacek 5y ago

Again, as across-thread: this is a tangent unrelated to the actual story, which is interesting for reasons having nothing at all to do with Roblox (I'll never use it, but operating HashiStack at this scale is intensely relevant to me). We need to be careful with tangents like this, because they're easier for people to comment on than the vagaries of Raft and Go synchronization primitives, and --- as you can see here --- they quickly drown out the on-topic comments.