I want to preface this by saying I have no beef / things against the person who wrote this. They’re simply doing their job and they seem nice. This is what I got from reading the articles mentioned in this post. Obviously opinionated but, from the perspective of someone who shares very similar experiences as the author.
–
The problem isn’t “how” to monetize. Most people (at-least those who take this platform seriously), know how to do it well. The problem is mainly, cut or percentage and the tools that we have to advertise with. The article is essentially a set-by-step guide on how to make creators and Roblox money along with helpful times on engagement and game design. On the surface, it seems reasonable. However, if you dive deeper into what percentage Roblox takes (~70.6%), it starts to paint a very different picture and the tone of the article may give off undertones of exploitation. This claim is used a lot so, I will attempt to iterate on it to make it less baseless.
The developer makes (~29.4%) of earnings. This is before taxes and whatnot. The share is not a guarantee because, on Roblox you’re paid fake virtual money that can be wiped non-existent at any second. For Roblox, the sale that they make (if valid & not refunded) is already in their pockets. It’s legal recognized tender and goes through intense global regulations to make it real. On Roblox, nothing is in your pocket until you use DevEx (which is governed by platform rules; is opaque and discretionary). Source
You’re at the mercy of conversion rate ($0.0035 per earned Robux; 285 R = $1 USD), cashing out once-per-month limit and 30,000 Robux on your account to even be eligible. Robux is virtual, corporate-control, corporate-facilitated, currency. What is earned is not immediately liquid. We have no real way of finding a basis of where these numbers came from (where percentages are derived from) and we’re solely relying on the fact that what we’ve been told is, in-fact, truth. This level of market control (where Roblox has the final say in how much you can cash out and when) increases the asymmetry of power between the platform and developers.
If you satisfy all the DevEx Eligibility Requirements, Roblox will decide in its sole discretion whether to offer you a Cash Out and how much you are eligible to receive in a Cash Out. Source
So if you never reached that threshold (regardless of how much time, money and effort you put in), you earn $0. You could bring as much traffic into the site as possible. Have X amount of users. But, if you don’t make the specific value of 30,000 Robux, you’re doing it for free while the platform is profiting.
Remember, just because they don’t spend money in your game doesn’t mean they don’t spend money in others on the same platform. In other games on other platforms, this principle wouldn’t matter at all because the level of being “locked-in” varies between publisher, game and sometimes, the engine (indirectly through royalty). On Roblox, the entity that determines how much you get paid and from what, is determined by Roblox and not developers. By definition if you don’t pay people enough (or at all) to those that bring audience or $$$ to your platform, it could be construed as exploitation. Which share very similar undertones as what you wrote unintentionally.
Additionally, the volume of games vs. the discoverability of them makes it extremely hard (regardless of what this guide conveys) to get your game out there and ultimately for people to play. There’s a lot of buy-in on the platform before you can reach the stage of self-sustainability and even if you’re somehow sustainable, it doesn’t last long. Which is not Roblox’s fault. All games are like this. They live and die with continued interest of the player-base. What’s different here is that Roblox maintains control over both the demand (player base) and the supply (developer base) which means that it has an outsized influence on who succeeds and who doesn’t on the platform. This level of monopolistic power to an entity that is also determining rates is rightfully objectionable to the masses (and new developers).
An issue that Roblox is plagued by is that developers are essentially having a bidding war for advertisement slots. You can do everything right and not have enough to outbid someone else and now, your advertisement may have less of an impact. However, regardless of whether or not you succeed, Roblox is already cashing in. It’s essentially, a pay-to-play scenario where regardless of your struggles and outcome, Roblox wins either way.
For a lot of new people (especially those making games), because developers are in a bid war less resource-rich developers are often times locked out despite the quality or potential of their games.
None of which is mentioned in the articles posted.
I don’t agree with the stance that Roblox is exploiting children but, I do agree (to some extent) that practices Roblox employ on the platform could be construed as exploitation and that’s what hurts the majority of developers. Ultimately, it’s due to Roblox not just being a marketplace but, an adjudicator of value and success. It’s a dual-role in that Roblox “lock-in” developers to their ecosystem but, it also reinforces Roblox’s power to determine who succeeds and who doesn’t. Disproportionate influence over the market is a huge turn off for most people that want to take this platform seriously. In order to break this barrier, thick-cloud, transparency is critical for an equitable ecosystem. When Roblox fails to inform new developers about realities of the platform and promotes “get rich fast”, “anyone can do it” tactics, new developers can burn / waste a lot of time, resources and potential.
That being said it’s common for platforms to have an edge in value-exchange. Roblox has a “chicken and egg” advantage where they offer access to a vast audience but, they maintain a great deal of control over what the audience sees and how much developers can earn from them. This level of centralized power can lead to exploitative situations, or at the very least, conditions that are not beneficial or off-putting to new and current developers.
Whether or not this constitutes exploitation is up in the air but, the scale of imbalance on this platform is hard to ignore and in my opinion, should be transparently conveyed in coherent dictation to new developers, current developers and the articles as a whole.
