RX-124-TR-6

transfem robotgirlthing 🔞

  • She / It

last fm recently played music


eramdam
@eramdam

You probably have up to 2025 until Google starts disabling/deleting Manifest V2 extensions and forcing Manifest V3, making adblockers worse for most end-users. If you use Chrome Dev, Canary or Beta, they're starting that phase out process now (as described in the article above).

For comparison, Mozilla's plans are to adopt Manifest V3 (which has a lot of good things) BUT not to deprecate the webRequest API (which is what adblockers like uBlock Origin use to block ads and (more importantly) change blocking rules at runtime)) and NOT to deprecate Manifest V2 which at least means that-one-extension-you-might-rely-on-that-has-been-abandoned-by-the-dev(s) won't vanish anytime soon. EDIT: I'm also remembering that userscripts (through extensions like Tampermonkey) will be made harder to use as aprt of Manifest V3 on Chrome as well source 🫠

Oh and Vertical tabs, Tab Groups and better Profiles management are coming to Firefox:
https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/heres-what-were-working-on-in-firefox/

That whole thing is really a shame because, like, Manifest V3 has really good things as far as web extension authoring goes and the deprecation of webRequest makes sense on a technical level1 but also, you know, it's Google so of course they'd have a vested interest in making sure the more flexible adblockers aren't as useful anymore 🙃

If I'm being honest I don't know if this phase out will make a visible dent in Chrome's marketshare given how easy it has been for companies like Opera and Brave to repackage Chromium with bullshit on top of it but that won't stop me from simping for Firefox.


  1. the new system uses a list of "hardcoded" blocking rules so it's much MUCH easier for a given browser to make optimizations since it can know ahead of time what URLs the extension will act on.


ticky
@ticky

as a web developer by trade I know all too well that ad and tracker blocking is core to having a decent experience on the modern web. google’s actions here, while couched in reasonable-sounding justifications, do not adequately address anything but their own business interests.

google are terrible stewards of the open web, and have far too much control for one dodgy adtech firm to wield over perhaps the most important communication medium of our time

I would urge you to consider your alternatives.

Use Firefox. Use Safari. Use Vivaldi if you must use a Chromium derivative. Restore the web’s health and wrest it back from Google.



geometric
@geometric

as you price lower, payment processors wind up eating a larger percentage of your profit. at one dollar, you will barely see any of it. even the cheap games on steam now, the ones that are playing the algorithm lottery trying to go viral through impulse purchases, are like $3-6. if you are anywhere but steam, you are never going to make it up in volume. i am begging you to charge more.

even ten years ago, the $1 iphone app store price point was ridiculous. inflation means charging a buck today would have been like charging 75 cents back then. if you made a thing you think is worth some money, you are not begging for nickels!!!! if someone is seriously like "I could afford one dollar, but THREE???? highway robbery!!" they live in clowntown and can go fuck themselves or get it in a sale or pirate it, who gives a shit, selling anything for a dollar these days is worse than giving it away for free.



geometric
@geometric

according to itch:

For most PayPal transactions, a fee of $0.30 + 2.9% is applied per transaction.

I believe this is out of date! Paypal currently lists their fee as $0.49 + 2.99%.

So for a $1 game, Paypal takes 52 cents. That's over 50%! For a $3 game, they take about 58 cents, or about 20%. On a $5 game, they take 64 cents, 13%. DO YOU SEE??? If every transaction costs you a base amount, there is a floor to how much you need to charge to even make a transaction worthwhile.

Even if you sold ONE MILLION copies of your game at $1 a pop, you are handing paypal HALF A MILLION DOLLARS.

And please remember, after those fees you are going to pay platform fees and taxes.


bruno
@bruno

The margin on a $3 game is not three times more than a $1 game. It's like 10 or 20 times more. You'd have to sell at least 10x more copies for $1 to be a better price point than $3.

And the reality is that you will not, basically ever. People have a fairly inelastic psychological barrier to spending money, and you have to overcome that whether your game costs $1 or $3. Beyond that point, the marginal difference in sales between that $1 price point and the $3 price point is just not that big.

You will make more money setting your game on Itch to PWYW with a $0 minimum than by selling it for $1.