Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

71% Positive

Analyzed from 1572 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#roblox#games#publish#friends#subscription#sense#age#users#game#trusted

Discussion (59 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

nusl•about 5 hours ago
Hacker News is turning into every other platform over time it seems. More and more folks just see a headline and comment rather than understand that headlines are designed to mislead you for clicks.

These requirements make sense. They're additional verification steps in place for people trying to publish games for very young users.

skrebbel•about 5 hours ago
I agree with you that the HN title is editorialized and misleading, but I disagree that these requirements make sense.

They only make sense if you think it's OK for kids to send face scans to scary faceless corporations. And even if you do that, you can't share your game with friends unless they also take a face scan! (cause that's what "Trusted Friend" means - it doesn't mean trusted by you, it means trusted by them)

calgoo•about 5 hours ago
No this does not make sense for the platform. Roblox has some of that old Flash feel, where anyone can just create a game, no matter if you are 14 or 88. If you read the comments, most people are fine with the ID checks ( i would not, but fine) but are completely against the charging of a monthly subscription to publish games. All the people that would do it for fun, wont anymore now. Basically, the corporate greed machine has now turned the platform into a "professional" platform, where you pay-to-build.

As a side note, if someone is working on something similar, then now is the time to start talking about it! ;)

yieldcrv•about 5 hours ago
Its because of AI slop

I dont know Lua and never touched it, Claude was able to vibe code in pieces a whole 3D Roblox experience, all while I was working in domains I did understand in another terminal window

Taking the Apple approach makes sense as too many ideas guys are flooding the platform with vending machine slop

bakugo•about 4 hours ago
This won't fix the AI slop problem. If anything, it will make it worse.

Vibe coders are far more likely to be willing to pay to submit their games, because just like their $200/mo AI subscription, they see it as a necessary expense on their path to get rich quick. People who just want to make things for fun as a hobby are less likely to pay.

drayfield•about 5 hours ago
Considering the history of child abuse on Roblox this is a welcome change.

>no matter if you are 14 or 88

Some interesting ages you pulled out there...

gtr•about 4 hours ago
That stood out to me too.
j16sdiz•about 4 hours ago
> These requirements make sense.

I think requirement 3 can make sense if we start painting everybody as potential criminal.

but requirement 2 never make sense to me. -- why need age check to publish to adult user?

jan_Inkepa•about 5 hours ago
(Yes, I would recommend a change of title.)

The step is a significant one, and Roblox has taken one other measure recently, restricting chat a lot for minors (https://x.com/Roblox_RTC/status/2043723470899437623) . I think this is a move to satisfy people concerned with child safety, not a cash grab. I think RB hq probably know they're making tradeoffs of keeping parents happy, while devs will be annoyed/fewer. But everyone can still make games and play them with trusted friends. Likely damages the network effect (Roblox's multiplayer aspect being one of its best parts), but oh well.

alt227•about 5 hours ago
'Trusted friends' is the key term here. To become one you need to have a paid subscription and to submit a face scan or id, which is what most people here are against.

I for one will not let my child submit a face scan to Roblox in order to become a 'trusted friend', and so now they wont be able to play the games made by their friends.

rb2026•about 5 hours ago
subscription isn't tied to trusted friends.

age check via face scan or id for both parties is required, along with ~in-person pre-existing connections or parental permission.

watwut•about 5 hours ago
Literally demanding the subscription? The headline is correct - you have to have "an active Roblox Plus subscription".
rb2026•about 4 hours ago
You need the subscription ($5/mo) to publish your game to users who are <16.

16+ audiences have no requirement.

choo-t•about 4 hours ago
Which is the majority of the users[1], even more if you count that any user without age-check won't be able to access your game either.

[1]:https://www.statista.com/statistics/1190869/roblox-games-use...

watwut•about 4 hours ago
Kids doing their first obby are <16 and their friends are <16. It is not like roblox was cool for teenagers.

It is also that your game goes away when you stop paying. Which means, pay forever or you cant show it off anymore.

jimbob45•about 5 hours ago
In what way did you find the headline misleading from the actual content of the article?
jan_Inkepa•about 5 hours ago
Here's an editorialized title in the other direction: On Roblox everyone can make games and play them with their friends.

Here's my suggestion for an amendement:

"Roblox devs will need plus membership to publish to young users"

alt227•about 5 hours ago
But the term 'Roblox Devs' can also include other children. You seem to be missing the point a bit that kids used to be able to make games and share them with their friends for free. Now they need a paid subscription and a face scan to do that.

Yes it makes sense when you apply it to adults, but Roblox was made for kids to share and play with other kids. When you look at it from that angle it makes no sense.

gib444•about 5 hours ago
More and more HN is turning into a PR outlet for companies

Upvoting gangs upvote the PR comment that downplays the article (the "actually, let me examine is why this is fine in very polished language" type comment)

So it's not like there a total imbalance of purely misleading headlines with no response to them

mr_world•about 5 hours ago
What if you could only upvote after you've clicked the link?
SXX•about 6 hours ago
People here in comments seem to not read past the title that editorized, but in a wrong way.

This is basically only requirement to make games available for players under 16 so its certnly done under regulatory pressure because no way on earth they can moderate every game from unpaid users.

alt227•about 5 hours ago
What about if a kid under the age of 16 wants to publish a game for other under 16 year old friends, like what Roblox was created for?

Now they need a paid subscription with an id check to become a 'trusted friend'.

calgoo•about 5 hours ago
Exactly, this will marginalize the creators of tomorrow who might have picked this up and built something, will now hesitate and probably try to find something else to build on. The people building giant games full of "buy this crap" every 5 seconds, spamming my 6 year old with prompts, they will continue doing so.
rb2026•about 5 hours ago
For friends, they need to do an age estimation only.

To publish globally for <16 users, the id check and subscription requirements then apply.

alt227•about 5 hours ago
In the linked page, point 2 literally says this:

Publish to 16+ and Trusted Friends - To publish a game that reaches Trusted Friends and users over 16 you must:

a. Complete an age check b. Have an account in good standing c. Have an account on Roblox that’s been on the platform for at least 2 days

throwatdem12311•about 4 hours ago
My 6 year old likes to make basic obstacle course games and I help him with the coding.

There is ZERO chance I’m doing ID verification or paying a subscription. The entire reason we liked this platform was there was barely any friction.

I will be checking out S&box by the creator of Garry’s mod as an alternative: https://sbox.game/

afandian•about 4 hours ago
Similar story here with Minecraft.

Luanti + Mineclonia is absolutely excellent open source software.

I get a great sense of peace knowing that my incentives, are aligned with the people who made it.

j16sdiz•about 4 hours ago
TFA:

> Publish for personal use - Anyone on Roblox can continue to publish games for personal use.

I know it is not great... but .. is that sufficient for your kid?

skrebbel•about 5 hours ago
My kid is 13 and likes to make silly Roblox games. No way I'm going to let him take a face scan with whatever creepy unaccountable AI data hoarding outfit Roblox decided to team up with, just so share his creations with 6 friends. How is it protecting him that he's not allowed to share creative work with people?

Good thing he was already messing around with Godot as well cause this kills Roblox for him.

rb2026•about 5 hours ago
Every major government around the world is rapidly rolling out online bans and age checks of some form for social media, online gaming, or general internet access.

I agree this is dumb but this isn't a Roblox thing so much as "what the fuck are we collectively doing with privacy?" thing.

Dylan16807•about 6 hours ago
To publish to the main 16+ pool I need to do "an age check"? But it seemingly doesn't matter what the result of that check is? I'm confused.
rb2026•about 5 hours ago
The age check is part of Roblox as a whole. It dictates what games you can access and the range of ages you can communicate with. They also extend age check to who you can develop games with, as the Roblox Studio IDE is basically a real-time multiplayer 3D environment with chat.

Accounts without age verification can only play all-ages games, chat is fully disabled, and they cannot publish any content onto the platform.

Charon77•about 3 hours ago
a bit misleading title.

> Publishing games that are available to players with either Roblox Kids (users under 9) or Roblox Select (users 9 to 15) accounts that we announced in our Newsroom will require additional verification steps than publishing games that are available to users over 16.*

CrzyLngPwd•about 3 hours ago
I bet the real reason is to add some friction to reduce the moderation burden generated by AI content creation.
wartywhoa23•about 5 hours ago
Well, standard drug dealer strategy: hook someone, then milk dry.
intended•about 3 hours ago
You haven’t had content moderation questions until you’ve looked at games and user generated content.

It’s such a stupidly thorn intersection of media, user behavior, and tech.

It’s not text, it’s not image, it’s not video - it’s a whole interactive play test.

If your mods don’t walk over the right trigger, they you don’t uncover the “secret” gacha arcade room. Even better - one mod runs the map and finds the room, and sends it for review, but the second mod doesn’t find the same room.

In contrast something like “School shooting simulator” had enough policy training and was obvious enough to be moderated.

People get creative with their tools, I’ve heard of entire copyrighted movies being smuggled into thumbnails.

Bonus points if you realize that this is how good things are for America centric moderation, and how it drops off for other nations and communities.

anthk•about 3 hours ago
You might like Luanti. Is not low-poly but I think it has some support with some full games, such as the Moon base survival one.
NeveHanter•about 7 hours ago
will need*
Advertisement
Imustaskforhelp•about 7 hours ago
Oh boy, the reason Roblox was this famous was that anyone could share their games publicly and people could play

Having a subscription kills Roblox and its ecosystem.

For context, Roblox has 170 million peak concurrent players, All of Steam had 85 (I got this data from someone at hackernews's comment)

This might be the end of Roblox. I hope more roblox's alternative spring up preferably open-source. There is luanti which is a minecraft alternative but I suppose a lot of games can have overlap to luanti and it runs on lua too.

mastermage•about 6 hours ago
I think Hytale can grab some marketshare because its modding tools are realy good. And they are built into the game.
demaga•about 6 hours ago
Wow they reached Stage 3 of enshittification[1] real quick. Now the slow and painful death begins.

[1] https://storage02.forbrukerradet.no/media/2026/02/breaking-f...

touwer•about 6 hours ago
Capitalism: there is always one more shareholder to satisfy
SXX•about 6 hours ago
This is not about capitalism. They will lose money on it long term and they know it otherwise they'll done it long ago.

This is move to moderated censored platform under regulatory "protect the children" pressurre and hysteria.

This is not affecting publishing games for 16+ audience.

0x3f•about 6 hours ago
Stakeholder, in this case: the government
leosanchez•about 6 hours ago
Is that accurate description though?

Capitalism: Shareholders need to be satisfied every year.