The price depended on the size of the audio, and audio files are much smaller than video files, especially when those video files also contain audio.
If you’ve ever finished a game and had players play it, Premium Payouts alone can earn you 2k R$ very quickly.
I apologize if my post came off as negative or offensive. I attempted to write it in a constructive and helpful way. I also gave alternative solutions.
Though my point about the value of 2k R$ being minimal is what developers don’t typically buy R$ through Roblox, but rather use R$ that they’ve earned from their development, which as I said previously, is actually fairly easy to earn even as a new developer.
The point is that the 2K requirement is completely unnecessary. If they wanted to avoid people spamming video uploads then allow a whitelist like they did when first introducing the UGC program. For most developers, throwing 2K at uploading a video that only can be 30 seconds long max? That’s a waste, there’s no good earning differential, and that 30 second audio likely won’t have a good impact on your earning margins down the line. It’s a disconnected move.
EDIT: On top of that, developers have been waiting for them to do something with video frames since they introduced it back in 2020. And this is what they come out with? Leaves a sour taste.
There’s still a size limit, and audio files are still smaller than a video file (with audio as well). Regardless, this was meant to limit upload spam.
That was my point. If you were referring to using a VideoFrame on a Billboard, while that does require more processing than purely 2D, that’s not as expensive as actual 3D rendering.
This only works when the resolution is greater than what’s displayed. That’s why you would upload a higher resolution.
Whitelisting is not a good thing. It was needed for UGC due to the complexity of moderation and copyright issues. But ideally, and Roblox feels the same, UGC is meant to be for everyone.
I think this is subjective. It depends on your budget and the purpose of the video. I personally see very little use in VideoFrames in general. The only use I see that would benefit the most is for pre-rendered cutscenes made in something like Blender. If I wanted my game to have cutscenes like that, I would certainly find it worth the value.
They come out with a beta release where all developers can upload videos now. I don’t think anyone would argue that it would be much nicer if it were free and had no upload or size limit. But that’s unfortunately not realistic at this time.
It’s alright to be upset about the cost, but I can assure you that it won’t be changing for a while. In the meantime, I would recommend using one of my alternative solutions, or just not using VideoFrames at all. I personally believe it’s better to be productive than needlessly argumentative or deconstructive. I wish you luck with your projects.
No ones uploading stuff in SD nowadays. So again, no clue what your point is.
Complexity of moderation? It’s arguably more complex to moderate videos than a 3d model. And copyright would still be the same issue for both, what?
It’s not subjective, it’s business. There’s a standard defined rate at which something is profitable and what expenses are worth while for your venture. If you think this philosophy is subjective, I’d take a few courses.
The argument made for cutscenes is absolutely silly. Not only would most prerendered cutscenes only really see use if they were longer than a minute, most information and creative foundations can’t be properly established and conveyed to the player within 30 seconds. You’d either be cramming too much detail in, or cutting out portions for the player to know.
No ones asking for the size limit to be unlimited, or upload limit to be unlimited. We have an issue with the price tag, it’s completely unrealistic and disjointed.
It’s becoming clear from your correspondence that you lack some real world knowledge and experience on why this is such a frustrating outcome from ROBLOX. Not only is this completely out of left field for how ROBLOX treats new features, it sets an extremely dangerous precedent moving forward. Soon we’re going to be paying 5K to upload 3D models that are above 10K triangles.
I’m not quite sure what you mean by “SD”. But I’ll try to explain my point better. Adjusting the pixel rate in the properties of a UI element doesn’t make the source media higher quality. The purpose of this property is simply to allow you to display the source media at a lower quality for the purposes of performance.
So my point is that when your display, let’s say it’s some screen in-game using a BillboardGui, is larger, it will require more pixels to retain its quality, even when you’ve set the pixels per stud to the maximum. This is because the media is being stretched to be larger than its source resolution. While this isn’t inherently an issue, you can still resolve this by increasing the source resolution (uploading a higher resolution image/video/etc).
There is a complete difference between moderating a 3D asset and a video, image, or audio asset. If you were unaware, moderation is mainly done artificially. This is true for most platforms that allow file hosting. They can scan the media and automatically detect and flag potential issues. This is done either with AI and/or cross-referencing a known list.
The issue here is that 3D assets are much harder to moderate in that way. There are also many works that are inspired by copyrighted content, but is transformative. I’m sure these issues will be minimized in the future, but my point is simply that 3D assets are much harder to moderate.
Art is inherently subjective, and game development and design is art. While you can rely on statistics to some extent, we also see statistics being proven wrong in art all the time. There are many factors at play. Your “defined rate” of profitability is not 100% accurate. I, and most players, do not support developers or publishers that prioritize profitability above all else.
I’m not saying that profitability should not be considered, but you’re looking at the difference between a mobile game’s monetization and a game released on console and PC such as Baldur’s Gate 3, Cyberpunk, Elden Ring. This is a topic I could write an entire essay on, and it’s rather difficult to keep it short, but I’ll end it there for now.
Most cutscenes are actually less than 30 seconds and provide more than enough information to the player. But if you need more than 30 seconds for whatever reason, you’re still more than capable of that. Cutscenes were simply an example, and wasn’t even meant as an argument.
I’ve been developing on Roblox for almost 10 years. I can safely say that I’ve experienced development since the early days of this platform and I have seen eminence growth in many ways. As I said originally, this price is likely temporary until Roblox is comfortable releasing that floodgate. However, in the meantime, you have plenty of solutions to either get that R$ or use alternative methods.
This is actually not out of left field whatsoever. I already gave the example of audio and how that used to be. The same is true for other types of assets that used to cost. In fact, many of these features also required that you had Roblox Premium (or Builder’s Club at the time). There was a time when DevEx didn’t even exist.
Overall, Roblox has been moving forward in a good direction. I don’t agree with every choice they’ve made, and I do wish they were more transparent (although they’re improving in that regard too), but we’re headed forwards and not backwards.
Obviously Roblox is not going to suddenly start charging for uploading models like that. This isn’t Roblox’s beginning of selling basic features. As I mentioned previously, Roblox has grown past that already. This is a temporary measure, and there are solutions and alternatives.
Sorry to tag on to this, but that’s also a very good point. The videos on a game/experience page are hosted by YouTube, where as the videos you’d upload for VideoFrames are hosted and streamed by Roblox. So you’re also paying for that service.
Although that then brings in the question of why videos on game/experience pages still cost anything.
As far as I understand it, it is in fact a Roblox video hosted on Roblox. YouTube is only used for the game/experience page. But if I’m wrong, ignore this. I don’t think I am wrong though due to the other restrictions they gave, such as size, resolution, and length limitations.
I’m not sure what you both were intending to use VideoFrames for, but there’s likely much better ways of doing whatever it is that you were wanting to do.
Regardless, and as I have said multiple times, most developers do not buy the R$ they use to purchase things. Even for a new developer, you can earn 2k R$ very quickly with a released game/experience, or with an investor. There are also alternatives like emulating gifs, as I’ve mentioned previously.
Plus, and most importantly, while this is a cool feature to have, no game/experience actually needs to have this. VideoFrames are something additional that you add on top, like sprinkles. I would recommend finishing everything else in your game first.
I hope you’re trolling, 4K video wont output in 4K for the player if they cannot display 4K there wont be a noticeable difference between 4K and 2K if your monitor is 1080p
I was saying it’s pretty pointless for a 4k video when most of the time the player wont have a 4k screen, sure in-game the PPI/PPS would be greater but the output for the player won’t change so there won’t be a noticeable difference
I’m not exactly sure what you mean by that. I don’t see anything about the player being capped at a specific resolution under the native resolution, unless I’m missing something. A higher resolution is still noticeable on a lower resolution display. Or maybe I’m not understanding what you’re saying?
would worth if the maximum lenght was 2-3 mins