5 ms·

Testing New Tools for Horizon Worlds Creators to Earn Money

16 points by cglong 5y ago

blue_box 5y ago
> A Meta spokesperson confirmed to CNBC Wednesday that Meta will take an overall cut of up to 47.5% on each transaction. That includes a “hardware platform fee” of 30% for sales made through the Meta Quest Store, where it sells apps and games for its virtual reality headsets. On top of that, Horizon Worlds, will charge a 17.5% fee.
- Scaevolus 5y ago
  Cuts like those work for Roblox, why not Facebook? [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gXlauRB1EQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gXlauRB1EQ [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTMF6xEiAaY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTMF6xEiAaY
  - Duralias 5y ago
    Roblox is marketed towards kids who either doesn't know any better or cannot do anything about it. Also, why is it ok for Roblox to have such high rates in the first place?
  - mmastrac 5y ago
    You're right. Roblox should not be allowed to charge that much either.
- kmeisthax 5y ago
  For all the grandstanding of Tim Sweeney and Epic Games about the "metaverse" and the "30% App Tax"... at the end of the day they made sure Epic's store doesn't take 30% and Epic's engine royalties don't stack on the store royalties. That is a show of goodwill. Facebook is now in full-on "self-aware wolf" status, complaining about paying 30% to Apple purely because they wanted to take that 30% and missed the boat on mobile.
synaesthesisx 5y ago
A nearly 50% cut of all metaverse transactions is a bit unnecessary, not to mention hypocritical considering Zuckerberg has been outspoken about Apple's App Store "tax". Facebook's primary goal is to have ownership of the largest metaverse platform (including hardware) so that they can rent-seek by taxing everything that happens within it. They know that they missed the chance on mobile (FB scrapped their secretive phone projects), and their ability to profit from mobile advertising is at the whim of the platform owners (Apple & Google). The "metaverse" will likely be successful - just not Facebook's version of it.
- mupuff1234 5y ago
  50% sounds insane - but at least it's more transparent than the usual SV predatory path of starting with a low\zero rate and then increasing once achieved a high enough market share.
pupppet 5y ago
The metaverse is complete bullshit. Take a medium that inherently has no limitations, then create artificial limitations and monetize them. It’s awful.
- drewcoo 5y ago
  How can there be profit without scarcity?
  - scotu 5y ago
    why does there need to be profit where there is no natural scarcity?
    - Arrath 5y ago
      It seems vanishingly unlikely for a company like Meta to operate something without a profit motive.
      - scotu 5y ago
        I suppose I was thinking the original comment referred to the concept of metaverse, not FB's product. Then my question was: do companies have to colonize something that doesn't have scarcity and fake it so that they can profit?
    - imtringued 5y ago
      During deflation the interest rate falls to 0% which is correct but since money is going up in value, the real interest rate is still positive. This means the real interest rate doesn't actually fall to 0% meaning profit is necessary even in an economy without growth.
  - TYPE_FASTER 5y ago
    When there’s enough demand
Duralias 5y ago
Weirdly high considering they were trying to entice creators with that Creators Fund.
jmoak3 5y ago
I made my first money selling and supporting mods for Garry's Mod. A significant portion of my teenageer-hood was spent as a giant crab throwing popcorn in virtual movie theaters watching bootleg streams and writing code to enable new features and worlds. The embedded video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJViJbEQEgA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJViJbEQEgA) looks like a joke compared to experiences achievable in 2006 G-Mod. Does Mark really think creative scenery will draw people into using his Metaverse? It's definitely not going to be the allure of viewing these creepy avatars. Compare that video to something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efulzGIVjWE&t=1007s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efulzGIVjWE&t=1007s Which will draw more people willing to invest time into the experiences? Does Mark even know why people play games?

16 points by cglong 5y ago

> A Meta spokesperson confirmed to CNBC Wednesday that Meta will take an overall cut of up to 47.5% on each transaction. That includes a “hardware platform fee” of 30% for sales made through the Meta Quest Store, where it sells apps and games for its virtual reality headsets. On top of that, Horizon Worlds, will charge a 17.5% fee.

Scaevolus 5y ago
Cuts like those work for Roblox, why not Facebook? [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gXlauRB1EQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gXlauRB1EQ [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTMF6xEiAaY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTMF6xEiAaY
- Duralias 5y ago
  Roblox is marketed towards kids who either doesn't know any better or cannot do anything about it. Also, why is it ok for Roblox to have such high rates in the first place?
- mmastrac 5y ago
  You're right. Roblox should not be allowed to charge that much either.
kmeisthax 5y ago
For all the grandstanding of Tim Sweeney and Epic Games about the "metaverse" and the "30% App Tax"... at the end of the day they made sure Epic's store doesn't take 30% and Epic's engine royalties don't stack on the store royalties. That is a show of goodwill. Facebook is now in full-on "self-aware wolf" status, complaining about paying 30% to Apple purely because they wanted to take that 30% and missed the boat on mobile.

synaesthesisx 5y ago

A nearly 50% cut of all metaverse transactions is a bit unnecessary, not to mention hypocritical considering Zuckerberg has been outspoken about Apple's App Store "tax". Facebook's primary goal is to have ownership of the largest metaverse platform (including hardware) so that they can rent-seek by taxing everything that happens within it. They know that they missed the chance on mobile (FB scrapped their secretive phone projects), and their ability to profit from mobile advertising is at the whim of the platform owners (Apple & Google). The "metaverse" will likely be successful - just not Facebook's version of it.

mupuff1234 5y ago
50% sounds insane - but at least it's more transparent than the usual SV predatory path of starting with a low\zero rate and then increasing once achieved a high enough market share.

pupppet 5y ago

The metaverse is complete bullshit. Take a medium that inherently has no limitations, then create artificial limitations and monetize them. It’s awful.

drewcoo 5y ago
How can there be profit without scarcity?
- scotu 5y ago
  why does there need to be profit where there is no natural scarcity?
  - Arrath 5y ago
    It seems vanishingly unlikely for a company like Meta to operate something without a profit motive.
    - scotu 5y ago
      I suppose I was thinking the original comment referred to the concept of metaverse, not FB's product. Then my question was: do companies have to colonize something that doesn't have scarcity and fake it so that they can profit?
  - imtringued 5y ago
    During deflation the interest rate falls to 0% which is correct but since money is going up in value, the real interest rate is still positive. This means the real interest rate doesn't actually fall to 0% meaning profit is necessary even in an economy without growth.
- TYPE_FASTER 5y ago
  When there’s enough demand

Duralias 5y ago

Weirdly high considering they were trying to entice creators with that Creators Fund.

jmoak3 5y ago

I made my first money selling and supporting mods for Garry's Mod. A significant portion of my teenageer-hood was spent as a giant crab throwing popcorn in virtual movie theaters watching bootleg streams and writing code to enable new features and worlds. The embedded video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJViJbEQEgA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJViJbEQEgA) looks like a joke compared to experiences achievable in 2006 G-Mod. Does Mark really think creative scenery will draw people into using his Metaverse? It's definitely not going to be the allure of viewing these creepy avatars. Compare that video to something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efulzGIVjWE&t=1007s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efulzGIVjWE&t=1007s Which will draw more people willing to invest time into the experiences? Does Mark even know why people play games?