12 ms·

Glad to see this, because they have worked long and hard on this game. For the optimistic, divide ~$4m (post-tax) by team of 2 for ~20 years (they started work

Glad to see this, because they have worked long and hard on this game. For the optimistic, divide ~$4m (post-tax) by team of 2 for ~20 years (they started work in 2002). They've made some money in the meantime obviously, but seeing the final profit doesn't accurately capture the overall investment. Just in case you were thinking of quitting your day job to become an overnight millionaire making indie games.

tinus_hn 4y ago
In calculating this you should also keep in mind the very real risk that that game you’re spending 20 years on doesn’t pan out and people don’t buy it. That risk makes it reasonable for the reward to be high.
nevi-me 4y ago
The tax should be post-expenses
- kybernetyk 4y ago
  What expenses would they have realistically? 2 PCs? if you mean their salary that still would be taxable at their personal income tax rate.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - nevi-me 4y ago
    Yes, I'm merely saying that one can't derive the tax from the $7m without considering expenses. Salaries being taxable at the employees' rate doesn't make it invalid.
    - aliqot 4y ago
      plus Steam's cut I'd imagine.
      - bongobingo1 4y ago
        Plus kitfox games, the "steam version" publisher, who AFAIK also brought on artists etc, non-nil contributions.
        kryptiskt 4y ago
        I think this is their cut after Steam and Kitfox have had their share. The gross from half a million sold is $15M.
- throwaway41213d 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - flumpcakes 4y ago
    They weren't asking for new "loopholes" they were simply stating how basic tax works.
criley2 4y ago
This doesn't really make sense. They were a donations-run "charity" shop making a free game. They only decided to put it on Steam so they could fund a retirement as well as a future for the game. For any indie devs out there: don't give your game away for free for 18 years if you want to make money. That's really the lesson here. Had DF monetized in 2006 instead of going free, and played the industry game as others do, I would not be surprised to see DF at $100M in 2023.
- kilgnad 4y ago
  Nah. DF became popular because it's free. That is a huge part of the allure.
  - opportune 4y ago
    Highly agree, if DF just came out of nowhere and launched their old versions before having enough cachet/community to get studios to help them get it polished, it would at best become a cult classic years later, but most likely just be completely ignored. Without all the slowly increasing cultural awareness and community building leading it to becoming de facto “the most complicated game that is also a simulation and art” it just looks like a really complicated, technologically anachronistic game for neckbeards. Which it still is, but it’s had time to build awareness that it’s also exceptionally interesting, and that that niche isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Also they wouldn’t have been able to keep it a single-person programming project focused almost entirely on expanding the core games features and simulation aspects if they released earlier. Way more time would have been spent on productionization and getting it good-enough rather than done, and more hands would be involved, making it less of a passion/art project of an inventor, and just a regular old commercial endeavor.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    DF became popular because of the stories it created - and being free helped that expand because people could try-before-buy. As it was, the risk would have been way too high for most people to pay tenbux or whatever BEFORE playing it (many have "donated" way more than that after playing).
paulluuk 4y ago
> divide ~$4m (post-tax) by team of 2 for ~20 years So about $100k per year, per person (after taxes) I know that this is nothing out in Silicon Valley, but for reference, the median income in the US is $19k (net) per year, and about $15k (net) per year in Europe (if you include eastern Europe). I can't tell from your comment whether you feel 100k is high (hence the "optimistic") or low (hence the warning at the end).
- axus 4y ago
  They've also been receiving donations since early on. Last time I checked they were up to 100k per year, but it started much smaller. I donated $20 back in the days when they'd send back an ASCII art scene in email or crayon drawing.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    And those early numbers are Tarn only with Zach still having a "real job" (Tarn quit his teaching job relatively early on).
    - selimthegrim 4y ago
      I believe he had a research post doc
- davedx 4y ago
  > the median income in the US is $19k (net) per year It's way higher, between $50-70k https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-276.html https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-27...
  - rtkwe 4y ago
    You're looking at the median HOUSEHOLD income. So on average the wages of two people, median income is a bit below half of that at 31k (pre tax I think).
christkv 4y ago
If they are smart the money will be taken out as dividend and thus only pay capital gains tax.
- gizmo 4y ago
  They are smart which is why they are spending their lives working on something they love instead of worrying about tax optimization nonsense.
  - tverbeure 4y ago
    There’s a major contradiction in here. I’m sure you’ll agree that it’d be mindblowingly dumb to not set some kind of company for a bunch of reasons? (Eg limited liability) And that you best leave accounting and tax filings to professionals so that you can spend your precious time on something you love instead? OP’s suggestion automatically flows from that…
    - eatsyourtacos 4y ago
      >There’s a major contradiction in here. I don't think there is. I wholeheartedly agree with the prior sentiment. Way too much of peoples lives are spent on shit that does not really matter. As a people we have overcomplicated the shit out of everything to such a degree it's disgusting. And it's all based on greed. Optimize this structure to pay the least tax, optimize your income into this and that so it magically makes more money. Meanwhile those without any real money can't take advantage of any of that kind of stuff. Yeah, really fair! Not everyone subscribes to the financial bullshit the wealth class has created.
      - dcow 4y ago
        The tax code is structured the way it is for a reason. It’s not there to be exploited. It’s there to be followed. DF is a business and labor of love for the two owners. One which generates revenue and is clearly above board. There is nothing wrong with taking dividends as the business becomes more valuable rather than increasing salary. And it’s not some mega tax loophole for the wealthy. By any measure these two aren’t wealthy. It takes 30 min with an accountant it doesn't consume your life and waste time and sap energy to be on top of your books…
eps 4y ago
They were also making 14-15K per month before that (it's mentioned in the post), so they were already extraordinarily successful as far as 2-person indie gamedev teams go.
- RektBoy 4y ago
  From what?
  - Slippery_John 4y ago
    Donations. They have a patreon and have had paypal donations long before that with the occasional donation drive to pump up numbers.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      Yeah they used to have a PO Box you could mail checks/etc to. I still have it in my billpay. The only gaming value that has come even close for me has been Factorio.
      - Akronymus 4y ago
        Maybe aurora 4x could be to your liking.
  - autophagian 4y ago
    Probably from their Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/bay12games https://www.patreon.com/bay12games
  - TomK32 4y ago
    In my days we were sending them money via Paypal and if it was above a certain amout, then they'd kindly ask for your postal address, draw you a sketch (I have three, one of them with two dwarves in minecart jumping over a ravine, one of them has a beer in his hand) along with a button.
- dmarchand90 4y ago
JoeAltmaier 4y ago
Perhaps if they'd put it on steam 10 years ago the numbers would look better.
someonewhocar3s 4y ago
[dead]
napierzaza 4y ago
[dead]
miga 4y ago
Question is whether they recorded investment in the Dwarf Fortress over the years, so they could subtract it from the base of the tax. They spent more time on this game than on any other.
hnthrowaway0328 4y ago
Yeah it is pretty good, but not as good if someone really wants to take the risk. There are people, e.g. fund managers and corporate CXOs that talk about they get the big bucks because they take the risk, but TBH what risks do they experience? If something fucked up they can simply walk away, usually with fat profits for their own. On the other hand, a couple of indie developers risked getting nothing from a full-time job, that's what real risk-taking sounds like.
- efields 4y ago
  Just let it be good. It doesn't need to be more. It doesn't need to be such high risk all the time.
- warent 4y ago
  You're thinking this in a very capitalist way which seems completely unrelated to these two gentlemen. These guys are now profiting off the game out of necessity, not because they're finally "cashing in" on all their "risk". From the beginning, this was a passion project and an expression of themselves. Not an investment.
larsiusprime 4y ago
Don't forget the publisher's cut!

tinus_hn 4y ago

In calculating this you should also keep in mind the very real risk that that game you’re spending 20 years on doesn’t pan out and people don’t buy it. That risk makes it reasonable for the reward to be high.

nevi-me 4y ago

The tax should be post-expenses

kybernetyk 4y ago
What expenses would they have realistically? 2 PCs? if you mean their salary that still would be taxable at their personal income tax rate.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- nevi-me 4y ago
  Yes, I'm merely saying that one can't derive the tax from the $7m without considering expenses. Salaries being taxable at the employees' rate doesn't make it invalid.
  - aliqot 4y ago
    plus Steam's cut I'd imagine.
    - bongobingo1 4y ago
      Plus kitfox games, the "steam version" publisher, who AFAIK also brought on artists etc, non-nil contributions.
      - kryptiskt 4y ago
        I think this is their cut after Steam and Kitfox have had their share. The gross from half a million sold is $15M.
throwaway41213d 4y ago
[flagged]
- flumpcakes 4y ago
  They weren't asking for new "loopholes" they were simply stating how basic tax works.

criley2 4y ago

This doesn't really make sense. They were a donations-run "charity" shop making a free game. They only decided to put it on Steam so they could fund a retirement as well as a future for the game. For any indie devs out there: don't give your game away for free for 18 years if you want to make money. That's really the lesson here. Had DF monetized in 2006 instead of going free, and played the industry game as others do, I would not be surprised to see DF at $100M in 2023.

kilgnad 4y ago
Nah. DF became popular because it's free. That is a huge part of the allure.
- opportune 4y ago
  Highly agree, if DF just came out of nowhere and launched their old versions before having enough cachet/community to get studios to help them get it polished, it would at best become a cult classic years later, but most likely just be completely ignored. Without all the slowly increasing cultural awareness and community building leading it to becoming de facto “the most complicated game that is also a simulation and art” it just looks like a really complicated, technologically anachronistic game for neckbeards. Which it still is, but it’s had time to build awareness that it’s also exceptionally interesting, and that that niche isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Also they wouldn’t have been able to keep it a single-person programming project focused almost entirely on expanding the core games features and simulation aspects if they released earlier. Way more time would have been spent on productionization and getting it good-enough rather than done, and more hands would be involved, making it less of a passion/art project of an inventor, and just a regular old commercial endeavor.
- bombcar 4y ago
  DF became popular because of the stories it created - and being free helped that expand because people could try-before-buy. As it was, the risk would have been way too high for most people to pay tenbux or whatever BEFORE playing it (many have "donated" way more than that after playing).

paulluuk 4y ago

> divide ~$4m (post-tax) by team of 2 for ~20 years So about $100k per year, per person (after taxes) I know that this is nothing out in Silicon Valley, but for reference, the median income in the US is $19k (net) per year, and about $15k (net) per year in Europe (if you include eastern Europe). I can't tell from your comment whether you feel 100k is high (hence the "optimistic") or low (hence the warning at the end).

axus 4y ago
They've also been receiving donations since early on. Last time I checked they were up to 100k per year, but it started much smaller. I donated $20 back in the days when they'd send back an ASCII art scene in email or crayon drawing.
- bombcar 4y ago
  And those early numbers are Tarn only with Zach still having a "real job" (Tarn quit his teaching job relatively early on).
  - selimthegrim 4y ago
    I believe he had a research post doc
davedx 4y ago
> the median income in the US is $19k (net) per year It's way higher, between $50-70k https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-276.html https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-27...
- rtkwe 4y ago
  You're looking at the median HOUSEHOLD income. So on average the wages of two people, median income is a bit below half of that at 31k (pre tax I think).

christkv 4y ago

If they are smart the money will be taken out as dividend and thus only pay capital gains tax.

gizmo 4y ago
They are smart which is why they are spending their lives working on something they love instead of worrying about tax optimization nonsense.
- tverbeure 4y ago
  There’s a major contradiction in here. I’m sure you’ll agree that it’d be mindblowingly dumb to not set some kind of company for a bunch of reasons? (Eg limited liability) And that you best leave accounting and tax filings to professionals so that you can spend your precious time on something you love instead? OP’s suggestion automatically flows from that…
  - eatsyourtacos 4y ago
    >There’s a major contradiction in here. I don't think there is. I wholeheartedly agree with the prior sentiment. Way too much of peoples lives are spent on shit that does not really matter. As a people we have overcomplicated the shit out of everything to such a degree it's disgusting. And it's all based on greed. Optimize this structure to pay the least tax, optimize your income into this and that so it magically makes more money. Meanwhile those without any real money can't take advantage of any of that kind of stuff. Yeah, really fair! Not everyone subscribes to the financial bullshit the wealth class has created.
    - dcow 4y ago
      The tax code is structured the way it is for a reason. It’s not there to be exploited. It’s there to be followed. DF is a business and labor of love for the two owners. One which generates revenue and is clearly above board. There is nothing wrong with taking dividends as the business becomes more valuable rather than increasing salary. And it’s not some mega tax loophole for the wealthy. By any measure these two aren’t wealthy. It takes 30 min with an accountant it doesn't consume your life and waste time and sap energy to be on top of your books…

eps 4y ago

They were also making 14-15K per month before that (it's mentioned in the post), so they were already extraordinarily successful as far as 2-person indie gamedev teams go.

RektBoy 4y ago
From what?
- Slippery_John 4y ago
  Donations. They have a patreon and have had paypal donations long before that with the occasional donation drive to pump up numbers.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    Yeah they used to have a PO Box you could mail checks/etc to. I still have it in my billpay. The only gaming value that has come even close for me has been Factorio.
    - Akronymus 4y ago
      Maybe aurora 4x could be to your liking.
- autophagian 4y ago
  Probably from their Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/bay12games https://www.patreon.com/bay12games
- TomK32 4y ago
  In my days we were sending them money via Paypal and if it was above a certain amout, then they'd kindly ask for your postal address, draw you a sketch (I have three, one of them with two dwarves in minecart jumping over a ravine, one of them has a beer in his hand) along with a button.
dmarchand90 4y ago

JoeAltmaier 4y ago

Perhaps if they'd put it on steam 10 years ago the numbers would look better.

someonewhocar3s 4y ago

[dead]

napierzaza 4y ago

[dead]

miga 4y ago

Question is whether they recorded investment in the Dwarf Fortress over the years, so they could subtract it from the base of the tax. They spent more time on this game than on any other.

hnthrowaway0328 4y ago

Yeah it is pretty good, but not as good if someone really wants to take the risk. There are people, e.g. fund managers and corporate CXOs that talk about they get the big bucks because they take the risk, but TBH what risks do they experience? If something fucked up they can simply walk away, usually with fat profits for their own. On the other hand, a couple of indie developers risked getting nothing from a full-time job, that's what real risk-taking sounds like.

efields 4y ago
Just let it be good. It doesn't need to be more. It doesn't need to be such high risk all the time.
warent 4y ago
You're thinking this in a very capitalist way which seems completely unrelated to these two gentlemen. These guys are now profiting off the game out of necessity, not because they're finally "cashing in" on all their "risk". From the beginning, this was a passion project and an expression of themselves. Not an investment.

larsiusprime 4y ago

Don't forget the publisher's cut!