Let’s talk about this 30% commission
LVL 3 Posts: 2
As the title says, seems a little steep for a new market. Are there plans to lower this at all after the site becomes more established or what’s the deal? I feel like that’s what’s chasing some people away. I read on Reddit that the majority of the community voiced their opinions and was completely chill with the idea of 30%. Is this true? I’d rather not get a dodging question.
For you non-staff readers – what is your opinion on 30% commission and do you think it should change?
LVL 15 Posts: 23
Well, they’re giving 100% until June 30th (it might be cool to see that stretched until there’s substantial traffic, but to be honest, it’s quite generous as it is). Most licensing sites take 40%, and they let you work your way up to a 70/30 split. The thing you need to remember is that they’re doing ALL the leg work. You upload your materials, and they go to work for you. It’s really more than reasonable.
LVL 2 Posts: 2
Unity Asset Store is 30%.
TurboSquid is 40%.
You can get a 20% commission with TurboSquid but buyers must find the asset through a referring link through their affiliate program, and you must be part of their SquidGuild program, which means you must remove your assets from all other marketplaces and sell through TurboSquid exclusively.
And yes, the general consensus on Reddit is that the 30% cut is fine, and indeed it is the standard. The only thing people had concerns was over on Reddit was the two different licenses and the content of the licensing agreement itself.
Knowing from experience, websites take a lot of time to set up, maintain, update, and pay hosting companies to run (I’m really serious about this one, websites with any decent viewership and is this bandwidth heavy is not cheap). The 30% commission is necessary to run a site like this.
LVL 11 Posts: 13
I agree with ZStriefel and Glenmoyes. The same goes for the Unreal Engine 4, which is 20$/month and take a 5% cut from any future revenue from the game’s release (made in their engine). For anyone who delves even a bit deeper into the amount of work that actually goes into researching, building, and then maintaining sites/products like these, it’s a small price to pay. The 70/30 split is fair (or the fairest so far) in this case.
LVL 9 Posts: 2
I think this site shows promise but comparing it to the rates of the Unity Asset Store, Turbo Squid etc is a bit much.
Other “sell sites” for assets like comics, artwork etc can be as little as 5% and there’s no reason GameDev Market couldn’t be competitively priced at 15-20% especially because of the 50$ minimum withdrawal (which is more bothersome to me than the commission honestly).
30% to a game dev/artist looks like a “publishers” cut for us, and we’re not getting anymore promotion over others for that cut 🙂
LVL 23 Posts: 12
Except CartoonSmart (which is not quite an open marketplace like the others), none of them do any promotion for me.
30% is fair for me, considering that it’s a new marketplace that need a lot of effort & money to drive some significant traffic here.
LVL 9 Posts: 2
@pzUH In the “Indie Creator” sphere, the % is quite a bit lower.
Patreon takes 9%, their (5%) + a 4% CC processing fee.
Looking at it in context, even indie game bundles take 25% or less and that is direct promotion of your game and only a fewothers at a time.
LVL 2 Posts: 2
This site is already promoting content creators by filling a gap: it’s an engine-agnostic resource for any type of asset you’ll need to create a game that isn’t just CC licensed. I don’t think another site like that exists.
The thing with Gum Road and Patreon is that they are not specific to just video game development. They are not trying to make things easier for people to find. They expect the content creator to put a widget on their own site and publicize it themselves. And by not having to design a platform that is specific to a certain need (like game art assets) they instead code for the least common denominator and not create a website for a niche. That allows them to get away with taking less of a cut.
The second best thing GameDev Market can do is have a really good curation and searching system for finding assets, which is the biggest problem I have with OpenGameArt. The signal-to-noise ratio is really lousy there. I would like to see a way to search for specific styles of artwork. The tagging system is already there, I just think people need to be diligent with tagging their artwork for specific styles: 8-bit isometric, 8-bit non-isometric, top down, high-res sprites (like in Flash games, I’m not too sure what that would be called), minimalist pixel art (a la Sword & Sworcery), you get the idea. Again, a system is already in place for this but making it easier for people to tag and search by those art styles would help I think. It would require some additional UI, but I would help.
The problem with sites like this has always spending too much time trying to find assets you can use. That is what will make the 30% worth it. Artists don’t want their work to get buried below mounds of stuff that a potential licensee isn’t looking for.
LVL 16 Posts: 41
Graphic river is 50-70 for exclusive or 30% for non exclusive. The only one I know of that works differently is logoground which give you 100% of what you sell for but that is logos on and works slightly differently.
At the end of the day each person has to read the percentages and see if they feel a site is appropiate for them to sell on.
If you work is good and reasonably priced people will always come back to you in the future
Searching and search trees are always difficult to design so that they are easy to use without going over the top with thousands of options. Crack that and you have a site that people will use again and again.
LVL 2 Posts: 70
Hi all, sorry for the late reply on this one, we’ve been really busy developing some front- and back-end features this week, but will be very active on the community from now on. If you have any threads / posts that you feel need our attention, just @ mention my username and we’ll be notified.
The 70/30 split decision was based on lots of factors. Sure, we looked at some of the other websites mentioned in this thread and saw how they were doing things, but it would have been impossible just to pick one of their commission rates and run with it, because none of them were/are doing what we want to do with GDM. We have a very strong background in web development, and have been working consistently with local and international indie developers to try to sculpt GDM into the website we and the community want it to be.
Our plans for GDM’s future massively surpass that of a marketplace. We hear the same problems time and time again that we talk to indie game devs, and we want to use the skills we have to tackle these head on and make a real difference. One of these issues is the lack of consistently high-quality assets on the existing marketplaces, and, as such, we’re working really hard to provide a marketplace that focuses purely on quality, never on quantity – we’re happy to grow slowly but strongly. But there are other issues; things like getting the word about your new game “out there”, finding collaborators, etc., and we hope to make an impact on these in the future, too.
In comparison to the other offerings out there, we feel that the 70/30 split is fair. We do not restrict our asset creators to selling only on GDM or penalise them for not doing so, nor do we force our own pricing structures on creators’ assets (who are we to decide what a person’s time is worth?) As such, our sellers are given an unrestricted sales experience and our buyers the safety of knowing they are buying quality time and time again. We are only a small team, and our time is spread over developing new features, planning our long-term vision, reviewing assets (honestly, our favourite part), marketing/social media and giving support to all of our users. As @glenmoyes mentioned, websites like this take way more time and money to setup and maintain than you would imagine.
PS: glenmoyes, your point about curating and searching assets is something we’ve been considering for a good long while, and we have lots of things in the pipeline for improving the ease at which you can find exactly what you need on GDM. Thanks for your input!
LVL 2 Posts: 8
I believe it is very fair, since I was planning to start this exact business in February 2014 and did the calculations for it to be 30% launch price then ultimately you need to take it up to 40% for the business to just just survive on cash flow.
LVL 8 Posts: 98
The price looks fair to me. At the end it is passive income, create it once and expect it to sell if the quality is good. Even if you get 70% cost + plus you have the option to sell on other stores as well. It is good enough.
LVL 1 Posts: 1
Commissions that will only about the thirty percent will also be better to get the only two percent of the commission. For the further details about the rules of the commissions you have to check this link right here now of mine that will conduct on the all commission ideas.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.