My kiddo has easily spent 500+ on Roblox across birthday/Xmas gift cards/chores.
I can't stand that almost all of the games seem to have a pay to win aspect, or are heavily advertising every chance they get.
As a gamer dad, I try to show my kid better games to play, but because they aren't free, his friends can't play. Just drives him to keep playing and wanting more Robux. It's compounded when his favorite Youtubers play...
Seriously don't understand how Roblox isn't being investigated for predatory practices. I imagine they can hide behind the fact users are making most of the mini games, and they are just providing a platform.
I've mentioned this in other comments, but I sat in with my nephews on a Roblox session, then stayed after to check things out on my own. There's an astounding number of adults on that platform saying some of the most horrible things.
The games are like you say, and there's some that are indeed the model of what I expected: games that kids and amateurs made with their tools. Car jump games. Simple platforming. Basic shooters. But then there are games that seem like they're some dark pattern mobile devs side projects lol Games where you do nothing but collect stuff or pets and there's lots of gratification devices happening and suddenly there's just a literal pay wall. Just the worst of f2p gambling addiction built right into player built roblox games over and over and over again.
But on to the adults, my favorite example was joining a 'shooter' game that was really just a shooting gallery of sorts but it had voice chat enabled and wtf there's some eastern european accent going off on gay people and talking about how the targets should have sombreros so 'we' can shoot "lazy" Mexicans.
That experience was replicated through a few games and I just wrote Roblox off completely as infested with people trying to help kids find hate based ideologies or get them addicted to gambling. I warned their mother, she didn't listen til she got her credit card stolen.
I struggle to understand why people are so toxic with chat in video games. I don't go to the supermarket, or even the bar and hear people just casually chatting about "who hates [racial slur]?"
There's John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory, which says that if you give normal people anonymity and an audience then they become (let's call them) assholes. I feel that, in order to buy this, you must accept that there are a surprisingly large number of assholes, much larger than I want to believe.
Are the number of racist idiots just much greater amongst Gamers™? (To be clear, I play a lot of video games myself. I prefer to believe I am not a racist.)
I'd love to say that there are a lot more young people playing video games, and they're just trying to be edgy, but I had a chat with some guy who was talking about getting his appliances repaired by "lazy [racial slur]" people. That's probably not a fourteen year old, right? I've seen that a lot.
I understand that it probably just takes one or two people per game to make the chat unbearable, but if I'm on a team with six or eight people, and I consistently get at least one of these fucking idiots per match, isn't that still an uncomfortably high percentage of the population?
First thing I do when playing a multiplayer game with proximity voice chat is to turn voice chat off. Makes play sessions much more enjoyable.
Sure you may miss the 5% of chat that is actually tactical and relevant to the game, but it's a very small price to pay in order to avoid edgelords and other toxic people.
To be fair when I was <10 years old my siblings and I had a lot of fun in AOL chatrooms and various forums full of people of all ages saying all kinds of things. Not that it makes it okay but that particular aspect of roblox isn't really something new when it comes to kids exploring the web.
> As a gamer dad, I try to show my kid better games to play, but because they aren't free, his friends can't play.
Considering how much you said your kid has spent, that money could’ve been spent on buying copies for all their friends and you’d still have plenty left over.
I upvoted you but after thinking about it actually, you will find that this will attract kids that are friends for the money and start weird dynamics in the social bubble of his son. But your idea is right! Maybe he could have done gaming sessions at his house or who knows what to better spend this money on other games.
> As a gamer dad, I try to show my kid better games to play, but because they aren't free, his friends can't play. Just drives him to keep playing and wanting more Robux. It's compounded when his favorite Youtubers play...
If there's a paid game your kid really likes, perhaps you can talk to his friend's parents and buy the friend a copy of the game. ...I say talking to the friend's parents first, because just gifting a game to the friends would be creepy.
But buying friends copies of a game we want to play together is something my friend group routinely does and we're all adults with disposable income.
Excellent idea. Two additional reasons: (1) many parents would want veto power on what kids spent their time on and are exposed to, including video games; and (2) you could suggest quietly buying the game through the parents, to avoid complicating the kids' relationship with getting stuff.
Some other, more expensive, activities (e.g., tennis lessons together, when the family of one of the BFFs isn't affluent) are harder for more people to do this, but video games are relatively inexpensive.
> just gifting a game to the friends would be creepy
lol well this certainly depends on how it's done. Walking up to them in a trench coat and handing them a disc? Probably creepy. But you could also just, like, send them a gift key on Steam...
I'm a gamer and I always play the games my kids are playing to see what's up. Roblox was banned in my house after I messed around with it on my own for 30 minutes. Most of the games on the platform are pay to win skinner boxes and they have a pedophile problem. https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2024-roblox-pedophile-pro...
As a new father that will eventually get into that situation: how do you ban Roblox in your house? I imagine it’s popular among your kids’ real world acquaintances (school etc). Doesn’t banning it exclude your kids from these groups? Do they feel left out?
Given the current state of gaming and where it’s heading I would love to ban gaming altogether but I feel social pressure from other kids makes it very hard.
I am a gamer dad too. This is something I worry about. I have been playing Minecraft with my son but he is learning about these other games.
I have been using some of similar messaging to smoking and saying things like that playing too many video games will destroy the health. Of course, I am not a good role model when it comes to living healthy lifestyle. And kids probably don't even understand what health really means.
How does one protect their kids against these predatory practices?
Ive been shown WhatsApp threads of the young teens who play the DRM-free games i upload - my google drive ID is effectively referenced as some kind of deity lol
Side benefit: No online play or interaction with the outside world, only with your own group (usually)
Or buy him a MiYoo/Ambernic and add Pico-8 games. Pico-8 is a great platform, games are free and short and sweet. In addition, you can pry under the hood and read the code, modify it freely, etc. It's a perfect on-ramp for programming.
I personally got a Miyoo for my kid but ended up getting one for myself. The fun and nostalgia are there.
Eh, I dunno. My son plays a bunch of Roblox and has spent a net $10 for a few custom avatar mods. While there is certainly a pay to win aspect for some games within, there is also a ton of "free" games to sift through, and since all of them are competing for players, they still have to make the experience compelling enough at the free tier. We've had conversations about the pay-to-win aspect, and even though he has several hundred dollars saved up, he has never once asked to spend money on pay-to-win aspects of Roblox. I'd argue that almost any modern videogame / mobile game is equally if not more "predatory" with the pay-to-win side of things. Just look at the menu screens in any modern first person shooter / battle royale type game. Those look far worse than anything I have seen in Roblox.
> I can't stand that almost all of the games seem to have a pay to win aspect, or are heavily advertising every chance they get.
That started at a certain moment in history, when paying online became trivial, so everyone who didn't produce pay-to-win was leaving a lot of money on the table. You need to find games that are older than that.
Some of the good old games are free, for example Starcraft or Wesnoth. There are many cheap games on Steam, but you need to review them first, or maybe find a review on YouTube. If the game is sufficiently cheap, for example up to $5, you could simply buy 5 copies and tell your kid to give donate 4 of them to his best friends.
Former Roblox player that quit back in 2016, there used to be a free currency called Tickets which were a free currency you could get through various means, it was a lot more restrictive on what you could get, but it really boosted my enjoyment of the game. The moment they got rid of tix I quit, because I refused to spend any of my meager allowance on Roblox (also generally being bored of the game after years of playing.)
Modern Roblox is really impressive, and really depressing. The things people make are incredibly cool, and they are rewarded incredibly poorly for it.
> Seriously don't understand how Roblox isn't being investigated for predatory practices.
Because if you held game companies responsible for deliberately fostering addiction in their customers to earn a profit, we'd have scores of industries behind them in line to be brought to heel the same way and the stocks for tech companies, game companies, tobacco companies, casino companies, alcohol companies, etc. etc. would all implode.
There's no danger of that of course because we long ago decided as a society that we're fine with vulnerable populations being put through an economic woodchipper to fuel our retirement funds, and that's been status quo for so long that I sincerely doubt there's any way to actually change it.
You forgot the most important industry: the food industry. But they settled that battle long ago.
And on some level I agree. We shouldn't hold companies accountable for raising our children. Simply mitigate their ways to target them And exploit their data (something Fortnite got dinged hard for).
> There's no danger of that of course because we long ago decided as a society that we're fine with vulnerable populations being put through an economic woodchipper to fuel our retirement funds
"We" did? Who's "we"? I certainly never agreed to this. Citation needed.
You should find abandonedware games for him to network play on.
Right around the time of the mobile phone gaming took a very, very sharp turn to pure sociopathy. It had always been flirting with it, but now the mbas are full on putting as much sociopathic addiction rigging, social bullying, and manufactured demand as possible.
> Though Roblox isn’t profitable, there are some significant caveats to the situation. Over the last twelve months, operating cash flow—a far more important measure than accounting-defined profits—were $650MM, about 20% of revenue. Roblox has been cash-positive for at least twenty-four quarters.
Namely, that as long as Roblox's cash flow is increasing year-over-year, they probably don't care about profit. (And if cash flow ever does stop increasing, they can always get back to sustainability by pumping the brakes on reinvestment spending.)
> if cash flow ever does stop increasing, they can always get back to sustainability by pumping the brakes on reinvestment spending
This is a point that's sometimes less obvious with cash flow games. It's possible to have positive cash flow even with negative unit economics, _even when no economy of scale can sufficiently improve those unit economics_ [0], so long as you have enough growth and a good cash flow situation.
That's one of the criticisms Uber has had over the years; are they capable of sustaining their apparent pre-reinvestment profits if they cut out that spending? It's potentially a bit different from the Amazon situation because most of the money is going straight into speculative bets, acquiring competitors, ads, ride subsidies, and other activities designed to lock in the market, and it's unclear if that will give them a meaningful moat, as opposed to, e.g., capital investments in a fantastic, in-house distribution and shipping mechanism.
Can Roblox actually become sustainable by cutting spending somewhere?
[0] Imagine a product with -50% unit ROI. For every dollar in revenue you have two dollars in guaranteed costs. However, suppose the product is paid for fairly early relative to those costs (e.g., the business offers a steep discount on yearly subscriptions if you pay up-front, the costs are incurred linearly throughout the year as the subscription is used, and there's a till-the-start-of-next-month plus 30 days lag on billing for computing resources used). You haven't actually used enough resources to be in the red till 6 months after the subscription starts, and you're not actually on the hook for that last payment till 7 months have elapsed. If you're also able to hit a 2x annual growth rate in your paid subscriber count (not realistic for large companies, not uncommon for a few years with good product-market-fit in gaming or some SAAS products), you've paid for the year's losses before the year has ended and still have an extra month at the end where the money is sitting in your account. As your company doubles its subscribers, your coffers will continue to double as well, even if you have indefinitely negative unit economics.
In the real world you usually have smaller numbers being considered (smaller losses, less growth), allowing the game to go on for many more years.
Glossing at their financial statements, about half of that is due to deferred revenue (stuff they sold but haven't delivered on, which I'd guess is sales of their currency that haven't been redeemed). No particular insight on that either way.
I can't recall the exact company name (Edit: it was TCI), but this was a smart accounting move that made one of the big US telcos frogleap the competition in the race for connectivity.
Basically, the company invested sufficient into long term assets, big infra investments like cabling, towers, etc. Because of accounting rules, they could choose to amortize all of that investment in a straight line over 30 years, OR accelerate depreciation in the short term.
I believe the company always chose the latter, and the net effect of this was that every year the company would show a loss, 100% related to said infra investments. However, when you carved out depreciation, the company was clearly making increasing amounts of money. Further, all that fiber was capturing new clients, which was free cash flow which they would turn around and capture even more customers with a new round of investments. In effect, the use of accelerated depreciation helped the company manage its tax obligations while expanding aggressively. By deferring tax liabilities and reinvesting capital, the company was able to capture market share and grow its customer base.
Eventually they had to show income and therefore pay the IRS, but by that time they were at the leading edge of the race and investors rewarded this company's CEO handsomely.
I had one of my wife's relatives in 2013 tell me "I'd never buy Amazon stock. They've been in business for 15 years and still are not profitable!" I tried to explain that it's because every dollar of potential profit was funneled back into R&D and company expansion, and that revenue has been growing steadily, but he just didn't get it.
If he'd bought stock then, he'd have ~10x'd his money in that time, whereas the S&P500 has ~3x'd.
I would have bought stock myself back then, but I was a broke college student.
HN hivemind has already delivered but I've found that for "I can describe it but can't remember the name" an LLM will have a decent chance of surfacing the name given the description (and is usually a very simple case to verify unlike much LLM output).
The bigger question about Roblox is how and why they got their special treatment from Apple. The whole concept of Roblox is in blatant violation of Apple's App Store policies. I believe they are significantly shielded from competition because who else can get that kind of ongoing and reliable relief from Apple's famously picky and capricious App Store reviewers? Maybe Roblox is happy to pay Apple their 30% in exchange for that protection. And this is not a small matter: Roblox is a public company worth 25 billion dollars based in no small part on this special treatment. The SEC ought to be investigating this.
I think the same argument could be made for Twitter/X. The app stores by Google and Apple specifically disallow pornographic material, yet the app is full of it. Once you're big and important enough, the rules mostly don't apply for you anymore. Of course, if they tried to circumvent the app store tax directly within the app, there would be consequences, but as long as Google/Apple can make a profit, it's okay it seems.
> I think the same argument could be made for Twitter/X. The app stores by Google and Apple specifically disallow pornographic material, yet the app is full of it.
Reddit is allowed too. imgur, snap, etc.
I assumed you're fine as long as your raison d'être wasn't porn and the content was user generated / supplied.
Can an aggregator/distributor be liable for user created content? You can find porn in Reddit or Google Search and these apps are still in the app store so I don’t think they are getting any special treatment.
Roblox gets away with this due to the framing that it’s a single platform with many different experiences:
“To start, Roblox is not a single game. It's a platform that hosts millions of user-generated experiences, such as historical roleplaying games or virtual labs to simulate physics experiments. Because of the diversity of content you'll find on Roblox, we use the term experience to refer to what you play on Roblox.” https://create.roblox.com/docs/education/resources/frequentl...
I think the best argument is that you’re a single player across games, kids speak of “playing Roblox”, there are portals between worlds, etc. This comment makes the point that all games feel the same: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41287780
It’s pretty different from what Epic wanted to do by offering completely separate games in their App Store without paying apple commission.
>Even Apple acknowledged this when a marketing head, Trystan Kosmynka, expressed “surprise” that Roblox was approved for the App Store in 2017 in an email. Kosmynka then defended this decision during the trial by saying Apple did not consider Roblox to be a place where people go to play games.
>“I look at the experiences that are in Roblox similar to the experiences that are in Minecraft,” Kosmynka said. “These are maps. These are worlds. And they have boundaries in terms of what they’re capable of.”
Wow. The damage control was even worse than I thought. So I guess the new UE Fortnite Network would be approved no problem since "it's not a game, it's a UGC platform" (not that Epic cares about app stores anymore). Because Epic isn't making the games anymore. Just offloading the labor to others a LA VR Chat.
How were they getting away with it for the 10 years before that when they were still calling them games and were still clearly in violation? It's pretty clear that the name change is just a retconned excuse and has nothing at all to do with the real reason.
If there is any kind of undisclosed arrangement between Apple and Roblox then there's a clear case for securities fraud IMO. There's a huge risk to Roblox were any such deal to unravel, both from the threat of competition being allowed and from the possibility of Apple starting to enforce their published policies on Roblox. For public companies, risks like that must be disclosed.
> Apps should be self-contained in their bundles, and may not read or write data outside the designated container area, nor may they download, install, or execute code which introduces or changes features or functionality of the app, including other apps.
Roblox is in clear violation of this clause, downloading and executing entire games written in Lua. Apple does have an exception to this policy for HTML5 games and streaming games but Roblox does not qualify because it is not HTML5 and not streaming. Many people have had their businesses destroyed for far less serious violations of App Store policy.
I believe there are also other rules against putting an app store inside your App Store app. Clearly Roblox is an app store for games, with its own currency. Apple has not been reasonable on this point with other companies: they originally didn't even want to allow cloud game streaming apps to play multiple games in a single app. Their ridiculous plan was to require a separate Apple App Store listing for each game that a streaming platform supported, and they only relented under pressure after Microsoft went public with their complaints: https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/11/21433071/microsoft-apple-... And after that debacle they explicitly added exceptions to their policies for game streaming apps. They have never done so for Roblox-like apps, which are still plainly forbidden under their publicly posted policies.
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what an App Store policy is.
You're reasoning as though the policy is for Apple to follow. No. It's for developers to follow. Apple can put whatever it wants on the App Store, the policies are guidance for developers to give them a fighting chance that their apps will be accepted. If Apple wants an app, it'll go on the store. If they don't, it won't.
So Apple's decisions are arbitrary and capricious? Tim Cook testified to Congress that Apple's policies "are transparent and applied equally to developers of all sizes and in all categories". Did he commit perjury?
My kids have started playing Roblox recently and they have started asking for some Robux so they can buy crap... I really don't get how so many people are into spending dollars on this stuff. Everything they wanted was ~$10-20 NZD and it was just throw away stuff, like a costume, etc. And then it's only useful in that one game you have brought it for. It blows my mind that it ever got this popular.
I got my 8-year-old going on Roblox because she asked for it. I had no idea what is really involved with it and as I watched her play it, it all seemed to me to be a big scam.
She would play games and want Robux. So she would go on her iPad and download iPad games that pay out Robux. The iPad games are total junk that only pay Robux after my kid watches ads. Some of those ads are for crappy games that pay Robux. Repeat the cycle.
I was appalled by the whole thing and deleted Roblox. She has gone back to Minecraft and does not seem to miss Roblox.
My niece was about $1500 into that game before anyone realized what she was doing. She had been asking for gift cards and what not to get the credits. My sister realized what was going on when she added it all up. She thought it was a harmless game her kid was playing. It has a lot of dark patterns designed to scrape cash. There is nothing more expensive than a 'free to play' game.
We limit our kid's Roblox and Fortnite in-app spending to Christmas and birthday, and she clearly understands she needs to stretch those game-bucks through the whole year. Four years in, it's worked out pretty well so far.
Because kids aren't utilitarian. They want shiny things impulsively now in whatever niche game they are playing at the moment. Or want to keep up with their friends who got cool stuff to keep status. Doesn't matter to them that they'll switch games in a week and lose everything.
To add to this, for them money is like ice cream, comes from parents rarely and gives them temporary pleasure. That's why I think it is good to pay your kids for chores or good grades so that they start learning financial responsibility early. Sure they'll blow their money on useless stuff at first but then they'll have none for some other thing they wish they had money for and will learn to choose more wisely in the future
It's not kids or Roblox specifically, it's gamers and platforms/games with "micro-transactions" etc.
When I was younger and still played online games regularly, I was initially stoked about cosmetic micro-transactions in (competitive) online games. Not because I wanted to buy them, but because these would fund the continuous development of my favorite games without affecting their integrity (no "pay to win" mechanisms).
Later I found this was a Faustian bargain. It turned these games and communities around them into something that I don't want to participate in.
These days I don't mind as much. Because among the sea of predatory, tacky or otherwise low quality crap there are way too many high quality, original and interesting games (typically made by small teams) that I will ever be able to play.
I don't know anything about Roblox specifically. On one hand the comment above is tragic, but on the other hand my understanding is that motivates kids to play around with Lua. If that's the case, then I'm all for it, because for me and many others that kind of thing is how we found our way into our profession as developers.
Some time ago I read an article explaining that initially games used to sell upgrades which were making the player stronger in multi-player games. The net result was that the games were loosing players because that mechanic was seen as unfair (pay to win).
So they switched to aesthetics enhancements only and that resulted the correct strategy to have in game sales and not loosing players.
Unfortunately cannot remember further details to prove this memory, sorry.
It's not only kids that buy these.
I know a lot of 40+ year old men that buy skins and useless junk in video games all the time.
They spend a ton of money on cosmetic junk in short lived video games.
It's puzzling to me, but i see it all the time.
It is illegal to advertise to children in Iceland because of this. They have no means to evaluate purchases like this. Modern technology has completely circumvented these laws.
Thats just being a kid. Their $10 digital costume was some $5 cheap batman figure some 30 years ago. I wouldn't be surprised if the skin lasted longer.
Of course the key here is that kids don't always get what they want when asked. I don't understand how some kids can just get unfettered access to a credit card and spend hundreds on such stuff.
>I don't understand how some kids can just get unfettered access to a credit card and spend hundreds on such stuff.
Easy.
Step 1: Find where your parents leaves their wallet lying around because they don't expect their child to attempt credit fraud.
Step 2: Punch in the numbers on the card into the appropriate boxes in the app because tech companies really don't have a interest in putting up any real barriers to prevent kids from spending money.
Who is "people" here? The children or the parents? The children are literally children; to them the funny numbers we use really are just funny numbers, they don't know how they relate to real value. As for the parents, a few credits here and there to shut them up and keep them out of trouble is probably considered worthwhile. When I was little they got football shirts, yoyos, trading cards etc. Same thing.
Yeah, this should be discussed more in my opinion. This entire business is just exploiting kids. I'm pretty worried about how my kids will behave when they get older and they will start to get bombarded by the Algorithm with all this "popular" staff.
I do not know why this is downvoted. The principle is the same. Likewise fidget spinner, likewise trading cards, likewise bag with star wars picture, likewise whatever plastic piece of crap is being sold to kids currently.
Eh IMO how is it any worse than a video arcade? I really think that's all Roblox is an arcade. Yeah it's the experience is fleeing and ephemeral. But these kids are hopefully experiencing what I felt in my childhood that I can't achieve anymore. I probably dumped 60$ alone over months going to Pizza Inn trying to win at Mortal Kombat.
There's something weird and sad about Roblox for me as an old-timer who still has silly dreams about free/open software internet utopias for just fun? There's so much creative (programming etc) energy in that place and, for what?
I get you perfectly (I play Roblox with my kid almost everyday) but I have another opinion. When I think about what it accomplished, I think Roblox is pretty amazing; actually one of the most amazing software ever made. It accomplished in practice basically what lots of people have been trying to do for decades, since the MUDs from the 70s, and what Zuckerberg wasted billions of dollars with. Sure, most of its content is total crap, but the same could be said of many other great things (the internet for ex.) If you dig a bit you can find really nice puzzle games (“obbys”) for example that require two or three people to collaborate, and there are actually kids there waiting to collaborate with you. So the point is, yes it needs active filtering, but the engagement of players and developers is unprecedented and pretty exciting.
My main criticism right now is this idea of jumping on the LLM buzzwagon. It’s sad that they don’t understand that their success is 100% human-driven, and that using LLMs beyond QoL stuff will be their downfall. The moment we get fully AI-generated games and worlds, it’ll be over.
My kids have recently become interested in Roblox. I installed it on the PS5 but honestly I don't get the appeal. The games we tried are of very low quality. It doesn't have the complexity or interest of Minecraft. It doesn't have the polish of Astro's Playroom (or Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart, which they are too young to play). It reminds me a little of Fortnite's non-battle-royal games, but much worse. Can you give some advice on how to approach it as a parent? I suspect there are some good games in there that we missed.
Why are people OK with this? Because there's a place to spend "money" inside this virtual space?
The paradigm could be replaced with literally anything, yet the prevailing mode of "play" in these spaces is convert meatspace credits to in-game "virtual property"; costumes, weaponry, etc.
These kids arent' making anything, they're aphids.
I've had this half-idea for recreating something like Garry's Mod in Godot for a while now. It seems like something someone would have created by now but it doesn't exist yet for whatever reason.
Like, a framework for building first-person FPS-ish game modes and handling all the asset management, sync, etc, like GMod being built around Source does and just letting developers build the game modes without worrying about the annoying tricky stuff.
Looking at the pages and pages of crap games in Roblox is a bit reminiscent of a long list of horrid software on a dialup BBS.
Everything popular seems to start as a clone of non-Roblox games, and then goes off on it's own direction from there.
Not Roblox's fault, but it's not a good place for kids to make friends; any kind of contact information must be censored. They can play there with friends made elsewhere.
In my (non-finance, parent of a roblox-player) opinion, the problem that Roblox has is that every single roblox game has a "roblox" essence. Every roblox game is undeniably roblox, and to broaden their market and attract higher-paying users, I think they need to fix that.
There's a certain amount of jank in every roblox game, and that's part of the charm. But it's undoubtedly also a reason why people with fatter wallets don't spend more time in roblox.
If you've never played a roblox game this might be hard to understand, but those of you who have spent time in these worlds with your kids you will know exactly what I'm talking about.
Perhaps more finance-related, but the monetization of roblox games is also extremely haphazard - providing more guide rails and designing payments more "in platform" would go a long way towards spending confidence.
I'm a dev on the platform and agree that there is a lot of jank in Roblox games.
There's some indication of more polish coming, as recently many games have been rewarded (Pressure, Shovelware's Brain Game etc.) from having more polished animations. Devs respond quickly to seeing other games succeed and take notes. The tools are also getting better. It's gradually getting less nightmarish to try to import a working skeletal animation from Blender to Roblox Studio.
Could Roblox games benefit from more polish? Absolutely, but it's less important than having quick access to a high variety of games with consistency in how you play them.
Perhaps the most massive benefit of jank-tolerance is that it lets devs "gradient descent" towards a game players want. If you released a janky proto on Steam, you'd miss your shot, get an "overall negative" review and be done. On Roblox you can release a janky proto, see its metrics, improve over time until you have something people want.
Sure, but it's not like Roblox is special here, compared to Flash games / Blizzard games' custom maps / Valve game's mods / Minecraft-Factorio mods / HTML games / dev's own website / Steam Greenlight / Itch.io / Unity (yuck)...
Sorry to hijack your comment, but could you recommend some kind of guide for someone who wants to start? There are lots of stuff out there but I need a filter.
I’m not sure… maybe. But at the same time, I think that having access to thousands of games that more or less look and play the same has its advantages and might be a big part of its appeal. If you had Fortnite reimplemented within Roblox, why would you play the Roblox version? I don’t know.
On the other hand, as a Roblox-father also, I do enjoy some of the more polished games, but I almost always fail to get my son to be excited about them enough for us to spend our shared playtime in them instead of the other crap. No free lunch I guess.
There’s been a few high polish games that aren’t Robloxlike. There’s just been very few that are breakout hits on the platform or offer any incentive to an external audience. You’ve got to remember that the main audience right now is kids on low power devices who can’t run a lot of the more polished games so they tend to fall off the discovery cliff.
Also if you look at the return potential, revenue from most top games is very small compared to the costs of high quality games.
I get the impression that they are actively trying to attract older players, perhaps at least teenagers or young adults. I assume because so many young kids play Roblox they are running out of new users on that front. And I agree with your comment and others here; the extreme majority of Roblox games are poor quality and it is very hard to sift through and find anything interesting. I think if Roblox could fix that they could continue to grow even more. Perhaps they could begin to compete with "real" platforms like Steam for attention.
Try doing the math of accepting payment (Apple and Google take 30% off the top), then building, operating, and moderating a globally distributed auto-scaling gaming platform with 350M+ MAUs.
75% may be too high, but comparing it to say Steam’s 30% cut for distribution only is a grossly imbalanced comparison.
Is 75% the minimum taken, only if you don't cash out Robux? Extra yikes.
> the company taking 75% of profits and having a pretty massive minimum bar (100,000 Robux / $1,000 USD) which must be passed before the person gets to withdraw anything at all, which is then effectively double taxed because the company will then only give $350 for 100,000 Robux when cashing out to actual money
Readit News
I can't stand that almost all of the games seem to have a pay to win aspect, or are heavily advertising every chance they get.
As a gamer dad, I try to show my kid better games to play, but because they aren't free, his friends can't play. Just drives him to keep playing and wanting more Robux. It's compounded when his favorite Youtubers play...
Seriously don't understand how Roblox isn't being investigated for predatory practices. I imagine they can hide behind the fact users are making most of the mini games, and they are just providing a platform.
The games are like you say, and there's some that are indeed the model of what I expected: games that kids and amateurs made with their tools. Car jump games. Simple platforming. Basic shooters. But then there are games that seem like they're some dark pattern mobile devs side projects lol Games where you do nothing but collect stuff or pets and there's lots of gratification devices happening and suddenly there's just a literal pay wall. Just the worst of f2p gambling addiction built right into player built roblox games over and over and over again.
But on to the adults, my favorite example was joining a 'shooter' game that was really just a shooting gallery of sorts but it had voice chat enabled and wtf there's some eastern european accent going off on gay people and talking about how the targets should have sombreros so 'we' can shoot "lazy" Mexicans.
That experience was replicated through a few games and I just wrote Roblox off completely as infested with people trying to help kids find hate based ideologies or get them addicted to gambling. I warned their mother, she didn't listen til she got her credit card stolen.
There's John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory, which says that if you give normal people anonymity and an audience then they become (let's call them) assholes. I feel that, in order to buy this, you must accept that there are a surprisingly large number of assholes, much larger than I want to believe.
Are the number of racist idiots just much greater amongst Gamers™? (To be clear, I play a lot of video games myself. I prefer to believe I am not a racist.)
I'd love to say that there are a lot more young people playing video games, and they're just trying to be edgy, but I had a chat with some guy who was talking about getting his appliances repaired by "lazy [racial slur]" people. That's probably not a fourteen year old, right? I've seen that a lot.
I understand that it probably just takes one or two people per game to make the chat unbearable, but if I'm on a team with six or eight people, and I consistently get at least one of these fucking idiots per match, isn't that still an uncomfortably high percentage of the population?
Sure you may miss the 5% of chat that is actually tactical and relevant to the game, but it's a very small price to pay in order to avoid edgelords and other toxic people.
You get these people everywhere.
Considering how much you said your kid has spent, that money could’ve been spent on buying copies for all their friends and you’d still have plenty left over.
Couch co-op is the way to go.... but as the dad be prepared to lose control of your living room.
I mean, I'm fully grown and I still get together with friends and play Mario Party and Smash. I just bought extra controllers and boom, good to go.
If there's a paid game your kid really likes, perhaps you can talk to his friend's parents and buy the friend a copy of the game. ...I say talking to the friend's parents first, because just gifting a game to the friends would be creepy.
But buying friends copies of a game we want to play together is something my friend group routinely does and we're all adults with disposable income.
Some other, more expensive, activities (e.g., tennis lessons together, when the family of one of the BFFs isn't affluent) are harder for more people to do this, but video games are relatively inexpensive.
lol well this certainly depends on how it's done. Walking up to them in a trench coat and handing them a disc? Probably creepy. But you could also just, like, send them a gift key on Steam...
Given the current state of gaming and where it’s heading I would love to ban gaming altogether but I feel social pressure from other kids makes it very hard.
I have been using some of similar messaging to smoking and saying things like that playing too many video games will destroy the health. Of course, I am not a good role model when it comes to living healthy lifestyle. And kids probably don't even understand what health really means.
How does one protect their kids against these predatory practices?
Like strict zero money after buying the game. Not on custom skins not on early access characters. We just don’t .
Just don’t give the money and don’t argue about details.
Alternatively, that one custom skill gets unlocked after getting a good grade at the end of the year or for birthday/Christmas/whatever.
Maybe fix that?
I Do this for young relatives.
Ive been shown WhatsApp threads of the young teens who play the DRM-free games i upload - my google drive ID is effectively referenced as some kind of deity lol
Side benefit: No online play or interaction with the outside world, only with your own group (usually)
But I have to keep telling myself those kids or parents wouldn't have paid for them anyway.
Maybe consider buying a few copies at least in the future?
I personally got a Miyoo for my kid but ended up getting one for myself. The fun and nostalgia are there.
That started at a certain moment in history, when paying online became trivial, so everyone who didn't produce pay-to-win was leaving a lot of money on the table. You need to find games that are older than that.
Some of the good old games are free, for example Starcraft or Wesnoth. There are many cheap games on Steam, but you need to review them first, or maybe find a review on YouTube. If the game is sufficiently cheap, for example up to $5, you could simply buy 5 copies and tell your kid to give donate 4 of them to his best friends.
It'd be cheaper to buy games for his friends to play than to support his robux addiction.
Because if you held game companies responsible for deliberately fostering addiction in their customers to earn a profit, we'd have scores of industries behind them in line to be brought to heel the same way and the stocks for tech companies, game companies, tobacco companies, casino companies, alcohol companies, etc. etc. would all implode.
There's no danger of that of course because we long ago decided as a society that we're fine with vulnerable populations being put through an economic woodchipper to fuel our retirement funds, and that's been status quo for so long that I sincerely doubt there's any way to actually change it.
Not if they have good lobbyists. In the US we still have beer ads on TV though tobacco commercials have been gone long enough to barely be remembered.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUY0w2cVAUQ
And on some level I agree. We shouldn't hold companies accountable for raising our children. Simply mitigate their ways to target them And exploit their data (something Fortnite got dinged hard for).
"We" did? Who's "we"? I certainly never agreed to this. Citation needed.
Deleted Comment
Who gave to your kid the money to spend on Roblox?
Right around the time of the mobile phone gaming took a very, very sharp turn to pure sociopathy. It had always been flirting with it, but now the mbas are full on putting as much sociopathic addiction rigging, social bullying, and manufactured demand as possible.
This feels like an example of the phenomenon highlighted in another recent post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41263855
Namely, that as long as Roblox's cash flow is increasing year-over-year, they probably don't care about profit. (And if cash flow ever does stop increasing, they can always get back to sustainability by pumping the brakes on reinvestment spending.)
It's pretty cool to get shareholders to pay your employees so you can be called "operating cash flow positive" as if their comp isn't an expense.
stock-based compensation
This is a point that's sometimes less obvious with cash flow games. It's possible to have positive cash flow even with negative unit economics, _even when no economy of scale can sufficiently improve those unit economics_ [0], so long as you have enough growth and a good cash flow situation.
That's one of the criticisms Uber has had over the years; are they capable of sustaining their apparent pre-reinvestment profits if they cut out that spending? It's potentially a bit different from the Amazon situation because most of the money is going straight into speculative bets, acquiring competitors, ads, ride subsidies, and other activities designed to lock in the market, and it's unclear if that will give them a meaningful moat, as opposed to, e.g., capital investments in a fantastic, in-house distribution and shipping mechanism.
Can Roblox actually become sustainable by cutting spending somewhere?
[0] Imagine a product with -50% unit ROI. For every dollar in revenue you have two dollars in guaranteed costs. However, suppose the product is paid for fairly early relative to those costs (e.g., the business offers a steep discount on yearly subscriptions if you pay up-front, the costs are incurred linearly throughout the year as the subscription is used, and there's a till-the-start-of-next-month plus 30 days lag on billing for computing resources used). You haven't actually used enough resources to be in the red till 6 months after the subscription starts, and you're not actually on the hook for that last payment till 7 months have elapsed. If you're also able to hit a 2x annual growth rate in your paid subscriber count (not realistic for large companies, not uncommon for a few years with good product-market-fit in gaming or some SAAS products), you've paid for the year's losses before the year has ended and still have an extra month at the end where the money is sitting in your account. As your company doubles its subscribers, your coffers will continue to double as well, even if you have indefinitely negative unit economics.
In the real world you usually have smaller numbers being considered (smaller losses, less growth), allowing the game to go on for many more years.
Basically, the company invested sufficient into long term assets, big infra investments like cabling, towers, etc. Because of accounting rules, they could choose to amortize all of that investment in a straight line over 30 years, OR accelerate depreciation in the short term.
I believe the company always chose the latter, and the net effect of this was that every year the company would show a loss, 100% related to said infra investments. However, when you carved out depreciation, the company was clearly making increasing amounts of money. Further, all that fiber was capturing new clients, which was free cash flow which they would turn around and capture even more customers with a new round of investments. In effect, the use of accelerated depreciation helped the company manage its tax obligations while expanding aggressively. By deferring tax liabilities and reinvesting capital, the company was able to capture market share and grow its customer base.
Eventually they had to show income and therefore pay the IRS, but by that time they were at the leading edge of the race and investors rewarded this company's CEO handsomely.
(I learned about it from HN here a couple days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41263855)
I read this in a book over 10 years ago, and now 2 articles about the same trick within the same week.
They had lot of profit-less years of growth and they have captured a big part of the market share.
If he'd bought stock then, he'd have ~10x'd his money in that time, whereas the S&P500 has ~3x'd.
I would have bought stock myself back then, but I was a broke college student.
Reddit is allowed too. imgur, snap, etc.
I assumed you're fine as long as your raison d'être wasn't porn and the content was user generated / supplied.
Deleted Comment
Why was a perfectly fine Unicode Blackboard X filtered out of my post.
“To start, Roblox is not a single game. It's a platform that hosts millions of user-generated experiences, such as historical roleplaying games or virtual labs to simulate physics experiments. Because of the diversity of content you'll find on Roblox, we use the term experience to refer to what you play on Roblox.” https://create.roblox.com/docs/education/resources/frequentl...
From the epic trial, Apple addressed why it allows them in a pretty tortured manner: https://www.polygon.com/22440737/roblox-metaverse-game-exper...
I think the best argument is that you’re a single player across games, kids speak of “playing Roblox”, there are portals between worlds, etc. This comment makes the point that all games feel the same: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41287780
It’s pretty different from what Epic wanted to do by offering completely separate games in their App Store without paying apple commission.
>“I look at the experiences that are in Roblox similar to the experiences that are in Minecraft,” Kosmynka said. “These are maps. These are worlds. And they have boundaries in terms of what they’re capable of.”
Wow. The damage control was even worse than I thought. So I guess the new UE Fortnite Network would be approved no problem since "it's not a game, it's a UGC platform" (not that Epic cares about app stores anymore). Because Epic isn't making the games anymore. Just offloading the labor to others a LA VR Chat.
If you want any part of any government to investigate, shouldn't you suggest some agency that's supposed to be working for consumer welfare or so?
Roblox is in clear violation of this clause, downloading and executing entire games written in Lua. Apple does have an exception to this policy for HTML5 games and streaming games but Roblox does not qualify because it is not HTML5 and not streaming. Many people have had their businesses destroyed for far less serious violations of App Store policy.
I believe there are also other rules against putting an app store inside your App Store app. Clearly Roblox is an app store for games, with its own currency. Apple has not been reasonable on this point with other companies: they originally didn't even want to allow cloud game streaming apps to play multiple games in a single app. Their ridiculous plan was to require a separate Apple App Store listing for each game that a streaming platform supported, and they only relented under pressure after Microsoft went public with their complaints: https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/11/21433071/microsoft-apple-... And after that debacle they explicitly added exceptions to their policies for game streaming apps. They have never done so for Roblox-like apps, which are still plainly forbidden under their publicly posted policies.
I think you're onto something. All of the nieces and nephews of mine that play Roblox do it on an iPad.
You're reasoning as though the policy is for Apple to follow. No. It's for developers to follow. Apple can put whatever it wants on the App Store, the policies are guidance for developers to give them a fighting chance that their apps will be accepted. If Apple wants an app, it'll go on the store. If they don't, it won't.
Deleted Comment
She would play games and want Robux. So she would go on her iPad and download iPad games that pay out Robux. The iPad games are total junk that only pay Robux after my kid watches ads. Some of those ads are for crappy games that pay Robux. Repeat the cycle.
I was appalled by the whole thing and deleted Roblox. She has gone back to Minecraft and does not seem to miss Roblox.
Addiction triggers and reward center abuse. This, to me, is no different than bright slot machines.
When I was younger and still played online games regularly, I was initially stoked about cosmetic micro-transactions in (competitive) online games. Not because I wanted to buy them, but because these would fund the continuous development of my favorite games without affecting their integrity (no "pay to win" mechanisms).
Later I found this was a Faustian bargain. It turned these games and communities around them into something that I don't want to participate in.
These days I don't mind as much. Because among the sea of predatory, tacky or otherwise low quality crap there are way too many high quality, original and interesting games (typically made by small teams) that I will ever be able to play.
I don't know anything about Roblox specifically. On one hand the comment above is tragic, but on the other hand my understanding is that motivates kids to play around with Lua. If that's the case, then I'm all for it, because for me and many others that kind of thing is how we found our way into our profession as developers.
Of course the key here is that kids don't always get what they want when asked. I don't understand how some kids can just get unfettered access to a credit card and spend hundreds on such stuff.
Easy.
Step 1: Find where your parents leaves their wallet lying around because they don't expect their child to attempt credit fraud.
Step 2: Punch in the numbers on the card into the appropriate boxes in the app because tech companies really don't have a interest in putting up any real barriers to prevent kids from spending money.
Step 3: Profit!
short rant over
My main criticism right now is this idea of jumping on the LLM buzzwagon. It’s sad that they don’t understand that their success is 100% human-driven, and that using LLMs beyond QoL stuff will be their downfall. The moment we get fully AI-generated games and worlds, it’ll be over.
Why are people OK with this? Because there's a place to spend "money" inside this virtual space?
The paradigm could be replaced with literally anything, yet the prevailing mode of "play" in these spaces is convert meatspace credits to in-game "virtual property"; costumes, weaponry, etc.
These kids arent' making anything, they're aphids.
Like, a framework for building first-person FPS-ish game modes and handling all the asset management, sync, etc, like GMod being built around Source does and just letting developers build the game modes without worrying about the annoying tricky stuff.
Everything popular seems to start as a clone of non-Roblox games, and then goes off on it's own direction from there.
Not Roblox's fault, but it's not a good place for kids to make friends; any kind of contact information must be censored. They can play there with friends made elsewhere.
Dead Comment
There's a certain amount of jank in every roblox game, and that's part of the charm. But it's undoubtedly also a reason why people with fatter wallets don't spend more time in roblox.
If you've never played a roblox game this might be hard to understand, but those of you who have spent time in these worlds with your kids you will know exactly what I'm talking about.
Perhaps more finance-related, but the monetization of roblox games is also extremely haphazard - providing more guide rails and designing payments more "in platform" would go a long way towards spending confidence.
There's some indication of more polish coming, as recently many games have been rewarded (Pressure, Shovelware's Brain Game etc.) from having more polished animations. Devs respond quickly to seeing other games succeed and take notes. The tools are also getting better. It's gradually getting less nightmarish to try to import a working skeletal animation from Blender to Roblox Studio.
Could Roblox games benefit from more polish? Absolutely, but it's less important than having quick access to a high variety of games with consistency in how you play them.
Perhaps the most massive benefit of jank-tolerance is that it lets devs "gradient descent" towards a game players want. If you released a janky proto on Steam, you'd miss your shot, get an "overall negative" review and be done. On Roblox you can release a janky proto, see its metrics, improve over time until you have something people want.
On the other hand, as a Roblox-father also, I do enjoy some of the more polished games, but I almost always fail to get my son to be excited about them enough for us to spend our shared playtime in them instead of the other crap. No free lunch I guess.
Also if you look at the return potential, revenue from most top games is very small compared to the costs of high quality games.
>Arguing that it's a "gift" when they're taking a 75% cut is just offensive.
20220707 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32014754 (Problems at Roblox)
> Roblox is horrendous. It is as dangerous as any dark corner of the Internet, except that it appears child-friendly to parents.
75% may be too high, but comparing it to say Steam’s 30% cut for distribution only is a grossly imbalanced comparison.
> the company taking 75% of profits and having a pretty massive minimum bar (100,000 Robux / $1,000 USD) which must be passed before the person gets to withdraw anything at all, which is then effectively double taxed because the company will then only give $350 for 100,000 Robux when cashing out to actual money