Just a reminder that Roblox is only going back on their double standards because the media picked up on it.
Front page games have gotten away with selling stuff in return for ingame bonuses (eg merch with codes) for waaaaaay too long simply because they make money.
The media picked up on pet sim doing it because nfts are the latest trend, and now Roblox has to enforce its rules to not look bad infront of the investors.
So its, you can exploit people as long as you do it here? I was hoping they were gonna squash this, we’ll see eventually, I guess.
I don’t believe selling a piece of unique art to someone is exploiting them. But yes, as has always been the case, it’s ok to sell things on the platform (giving Roblox a commission), so they’re integrating NFTs into the platform.
Thank you for investigating. Cryptos and NFTs are risky and Roblox needs to stop stuff happening like this in the future
Care to provide proof for that one chief?
So good to know that Roblox is investigating this now.
Are you sure? Cause i never have seen them talking about integrating metamask into the website before, Do you have a official source or you just made it up?
Exactly, It would be very sad if Roblox did not take action.
I agree.
However, the developer should’ve researched NFT’s and figured, “Oh crap, this aint for kids.”.
But, humans make mistakes I guess. 
Yeah I don’t think it’s ideal, but users know what they’re getting when they spend money. Right now dragons are mostly cosmetic, but they do provide speed bonuses (and are thus pay to win in that sense.) I’ve been working for the last year on changes to how everything will work, and I post details here. I plan to change the business model so characters are more accessible with most of the monetization moved to cosmetics, with a reasonably non-pay-to-win grind to get it from baby to adult. One of the main reasons the price is high is because there are lots of other non-dragon characters that I want people to use instead. I also have an animator and 3d artist hired full time working on free improvements to characters that users bought years ago.
Anyways, I feel pressured to monetize more aggressively to keep up with other experiences that employ predatory business models. I would certainly earn more if dragons were obtained as a <1% chance from a lootbox, and it’s sad that I could even do that legally (It’s practically a slot machine at that point, because it’s always possible to receive something subjectively worthless.) With NFT’s in the mix I think I would just be done; Experiences willing to do this would have massively higher incomes by bypassing Roblox’s cash out rate (and even real-world taxes), and I just can’t compete with that. I don’t want to develop on a platform where top experiences exploit kids for money. Not to mention environmental concerns.
I became a parent in 2018, and I’m honestly not sure if I’d let my kids play Roblox (or most popular online games.) I don’t think it’s very healthy for kids to buy power over others in games, but pay-to-win aspects aren’t always harmful. It’s one thing for a poor family to save up for a product for their child, like a DLC, cosmetic, or XP boost, but it’s just completely horrible when they are only paying for a chance to get what the child wants.
Will Shard Seekers ever sell lootboxes?
Many competing games have unethical monetization where you receive a random item when you spend real money, and hype up the <1% rare items that you would need to spend hundreds of dollars to have a chance at. What’s frustrating is that some of these games get tons of money from kids, and don’t even put that money back into the game to add fun high budget content.
I don’t like lootboxes. Imagine if you needed to spin a wheel every time you wanted a new animal, and couldn’t just buy what you want. Players might spend more money to support the game, but that doesn’t make it okay. It’s akin to gambling and I don’t think it’s healthy for children. I’m a dad and I overwork myself every day so that I can earn enough to support a team of content artists, while trying to provide ethical monetization in a fun, free to play environment.
Players will optimize the fun out of a game given the chance, and randomness is exciting. With lootboxes, spending money becomes the game. If I ever need to add random mechanics to purchases, I promise to keep it minimal, for example, buying bonus XP for a character’s random level. I would only add random purchase mechanics if it was the only way to compete in a market where most other games do it.
You should talk to your parents about whether lootboxes should be regulated, and send feedback to your local government if you feel strongly. Many big AAA games take it too far and it needs to be addressed by the world. Lootboxes exist on a spectrum and come in many forms. Some are more harmful than others, and the line can get fuzzy (like getting random loot from a boss that you paid to fight.) With baseball/etc. cards you get physical objects, but it’s still the same. These products have perceived value, and the value you receive is up to chance.
That’s good to hear. You may be surprised if making the items more attainable increases your player base and sales. Its possible. I do commend your transparent pricing though vs. hiding it behind a roulette wheel. Good luck in your restructuring.
I hope they do not take action on the game, more of a less just a warning. Big Games makes some of their biggest games, aka Pet Simulator X which has gotten a billion visits within just a few months. I highly doubt they will delete the game, nor ban Preston. But we’ll see what happens
I was at RDC and have not hear any of this. If you want to lie to drum up drama, at least make it more credible than “I saw it but can’t see it anymore”
I would like to believe @JetUpNy is trolling, so you should just ignore them.
For anyone wondering, They did do the Huge cat plushie which maybe isn’t considered off-platform buying, since you are technically buying a plushie with a CODE on it, Compared to an NFT which is straight up Buying it/Bidding for it.
Limiteds aren’t NFTs… the only thing they talked about in terms of limiteds is them possibly bringing them back for UGC creations. This is more of an explanation of what they are to the people unassociated with Roblox. Before you speculate, look for the greater context at hand.
Where is the line drawn? Could I sell a pin for $50 that comes with an in-game item that’s worth $30 (after DevEx) of in-game currency? That’s a significantly better profit margin than when users spend Robux.
I’m sorry, but this is just not true.
I would argue that it actually makes a lot of sense why someone would sell something for that much- to make a big profit.
I just want to personally say that I’m extremely glad that Roblox is at the very minimum responding to the controversy (something they don’t commonly do), though I do think this brings up more questions then it does answers.
Like for example, if it turns out that Pet Simulator X indeed was breaking ToS, and results in administrative action taken upon the game, (either in just the NFT part being removed, or even the entire game getting taken down), what then will happen to the people who spent literal thousands of USD worth of Crypto on the NFTs? Will they get refunds, or will they be completely screwed? If they ultimately don’t get refunded, Roblox should step in and do something, since this took place on their platform.
Also,(correct me if I’m wrong might be misinformation but unsure) the owner of Pet Simulator X reportedly asked Roblox for permission to sell NFTs, and they gave the “all clear” to him to do so. Why didn’t they just resolve the issue from the beginning and not have to deal with all of this to begin with?
Regardless, this is a step in the right direction and this should serve as reference to future Developers who want to try cheating the system.