Bits are no longer only for Cheering. In Extensions, they can be used to power new, interactive experiences on streamer’s channels.
Whenever viewers use Bits in Extensions, Twitch provides a revenue share of 80% for the Bits used to the Partner or Affiliate, and 20% to the Extension developer. Check out the details here.
Bits in Extensions is available in preview to a limited set of developers, but we’re working to make this available to all developers later this summer. If you’re interested in developing an Extension that uses Bits, please keep a look out here for details soon on how to get in touch or follow @TwitchDev on Twitter!
I wish there were a proper RFC for this, but I’ll leave my feedback about this topic this here for now.
As a developer of an app, and in the future- an extension that will build off of my app. Will there be a way to opt out of the 20% developer cut?
I assume that of the 80/20 split Twitch won’t be taking anything more from either side, as a cut has already been taken in the purchase of bits, so providing an opt-out shouldn’t theoretically hurt the companies profits any. It would only affect either the developer or the streamer.
The reason I would want an opt-out is because my app already has paid options offsite through my own service. Streamers must pay to use some tiers of my service, and I don’t want to suddenly double dip by cutting into their profits. My app is designed to help the streamer provide a better, more entertaining, and less exhausting stream, so I may still want to include paid options of the streamers choosing.
My app provides tools to allow streamers to better earn revenue, but I don’t want to take any of the profit away from them.
@BigMistake please don’t let that discourage you if a similar extension was created! We still see that there are a ton of opportunities to help the community. You may even be able to improve upon the existing one out there!
@TheElm Thanks for the great feedback. We are still evaluating the options for the longer term, but in the immediate term it will remain fixed. Feedback like this is exactly what we love to hear to help us understand how to best evolve the product. Stay tuned!
A lone developer competing against a company that has partnered with Twitch, yeah, that sounds like an uphill battle. What are the chances of getting into the beta if I offer the same functionality as them?
I was far enough into development that I planned on sending in my first version for review next month (and hoped to eventually make it my job) but how can I compete with a company that has several developers working fulltime? I’ve been smashing my head into things for a couple of hours now, this really sucks.
Being a 3rd party dev in some ways is similar to being a streamer, just like you shouldn’t expect to start streaming and suddenly be the next Lirik, or Ninja, don’t plan to start working on Twitch apps/extensions and be the next StreamLabs and gamble your financial stability on that. It doesn’t matter if your extension idea has been done already, just keep at it and work on it out of passion rather than the hopes of making money. Stop trying to see it as a competition with the bigger developers.
In general people seem to expect everything from devs to be free these days, as most apps you use are free, so it’s great that there’s a fixed dev share on this from day 1. If some extensions are made free of dev share, it will again set the expectation that devs don’t deserve a share in their work.
You already see some hostility from viewers (not streamers) on dev share, even though streamer share is praised to the skies.
So I’m definitely against being able to remove dev share from extensions.
It’s not a 1 size fits all thing though. While I agree with you to some extent for public extensions, it is also worth considering that there are some devs, such as myself, who develop private apps that aren’t available to all streamers. What if one of my streamers wanted me to try implement some in-extension monetization option for their channel, and compensated me for my time and upkeep of the app, are you against removing the dev share even in that circumstance where I would already being paid? With how it is currently, I would be forced to take a share of the bits, just to then pay it back to the streamer, or completely rework pre-existing agreements.
That’s definitely true. But in that case shouldn’t the streamer then have control over the extension, on their own account, since they are the one who technically paid and developed it, and you are the just hired help?
Then the dev share would be paid to the streamer’s own account, not yours.
As then to push an update or to change anything on the extension, or deploy a new version, or cycle the secrets you have to wait for the potentially busy (or less technically apt.) streamer to do the changes.
Barry beat me to what I was about to reply. What you’re suggestion isn’t viable as it shouldn’t be on the streamer to do that, and when you also add that multiple streamers use what I work on, it would mean each streamer needing to create and manage the exact same extension I’m developing for them, just under their own name.
I’m fine with 80/20 being the ‘default’ share option, it’s just not fit for everyone though.
Paying developers via bits spent in-app is an incomplete solution as it is. It drives devs towards specific types of extensions that encourage monetization/gamification of the viewers, rather than QoL apps that simply improve the streaming/viewing experience.
You have a point, but Twitch has said multiple times they’d like (Extension) developers to create and monetize their work and make a business of it. I’m not gambling on anything, but if there’s going to be a company focusing on in large parts the same things as me, I’m going to readjust my priorities.
Interesting how can I use this feature, how long will it take to release this functionality to other developers?
time is of the most precious resources in software development, the faster we release, the less time we will lose thinking about how to implement this in the middle of the code.
I am doing extensions as a hobby and can relate to a number of things raised here.
Full disclosure I was selected to participate in the beta.
@BigMistake I believe they will still consider you just the same, they want the competition as it benefits twitch and streamers. I can relate to the feeling of seeing one of the big companies have the same idea. I want to work on niche idea’s as I know I can’t compete against the big guns, but its hard to know what they are working on in secret, plus if they see the success of small devs they would be foolish to not try and take the market. It’s the same as any market place i guess. I have people asking me to make poll/voting extensions but with it being serviced so well you have to choose your battles. I’d argue making a business out of it would be like any start up, with the risk of failure being very high which is why I wont be quitting my day job any time soon.
On the discussion of the cut, i can see why its fixed for now. If they were to remove the 20/80, larger companies would give them full proceeds and recoup costs elsewhere so no one would be using a competitor, at least at this stage. I’d agree white listing broadcasters to receive full bits would have a lot of merit, especially when developing for a specific broadcaster. I can see Twitch wanting to reclaim the money currently floating around in donations and they are pretty specific that the only kind of money that can be used via extensions are bits. It wouldn’t surprise me if they state that you can only make money from the income through twitch (say if they add ‘monthly cost’ to installing it for broadcasters) to make sure that people aren’t going off site to do the transactions.
