Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Your only options are like Fornite, Roblox, or Minecraft.

What?? Unlike phones nothing locks people into only playing a specific game. And there are so many other games out there to choose from.



Nothing locks you into a specific phone. I have both a primary Android and iOS phone that I use.

>are so many other games out there to choose from.

But how many can you make a business on top of that can pay competitively? It's like how there are a ton of operating systems to choose from, yet only a few that are viable to build upon.


Games are there to be played. Not being able to build a business on top of a game does not make it irrelevant.

f you want to start a business making games then you really should consider using a game engine rather than something like Roblox because Roblox takes a massive cut (way more than 30%) when looking at what users pay vs. what you cash out. I don't


This whole conversation is about how there is very few options for games where it is financially viable to build content for them as a third party. I am not claiming that other games are not fun, you just can't make a successful business on top of them.

Yes, it's possible to make your own game, but it's also possible to make your own app store. There is value in being able to build on top of successful platforms. These existing app stores can demand a bigger cut than doing things yourself because they bring a lot of value and paying customers to the table.


> This whole conversation is about how there is very few options for games where it is financially viable to build content for them as a third party.

Because games are not platforms. Roblox is a platform - games ("experiences") are all UGC. Fortnite is a game that Epic is turning into a platform. Not sure what Minecraft is doing but it doesn't seem anywhere near as financially viable for creators pas Roblox.

It's an interesting thing to think about because Roblox does not exactly follow the App Store review guidelines. Code and assets are downloaded onto your device to run the games. If you could add them to your home screen then it wouldn't be so far off from a game-specific app store.


And so many exceptions to that.

One example?

Stardew Valley. Runs on everything, not just "viable" OSs, made by a single person, and easily competes with an entire genre of gaming to pay the author.


The upper bound of building a business on top of Stardew Valley appears to be https://www.patreon.com/pathoschild which makes under $400 per month after Patreon's cut. That's not enough to work as a single person full time let alone hiring a team.


Um... No? [0]

A $400/mo Patreon does not exactly outweigh somewhere between 18-35 million sales on a single one of the platforms it supports. I would not call that the "upper bound".

[0] https://steamdb.info/app/413150/charts/


That 18-35 million goes to the game's developer and probably not even a single penny goes to those building a business off of designing content on top of the game. That figure is irrelevant.

Taking Fortnite as an example the relevant figure would be that creators on Fortnite can make over $10 million per year. Bringing up that Epic made a few billion dollars is irrelevant to what this conversation is about, which is games where it is financially viable to build content for them.


> which is games where it is financially viable to build content for them.

If that was your interpretation, then it would have been better to have mentioned it anywhere upthread. What we have, so far, is people talking about the gaming industry, and you calling it a monopoly. Nowhere before do we have a mention of third-party developers.


I got tripped up because the parent comment used the term "Fortnite store" when I think they meant "Epic Games Store", so I didn't mention the monopolization that I was talking about was in game monetization upon an existing game.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: