Hello Garry,
I’m writing this as someone who genuinely wants S&box to succeed long-term.
Since the introduction of Playfund, the current incentive structure appears to reward fast, low-effort engagement loops over ambitious or well-crafted games. As a result, more and more projects seem designed primarily to maximize retention metrics rather than to deliver meaningful gameplay.
This is concerning because it shapes the platform’s identity. If new players mostly encounter shallow clicker-style experiences, they may conclude that this is what S&box is about — which could discourage both players seeking depth and developers working on serious projects.
I would like to suggest a potential solution inspired by the old Steam Greenlight model:
Introduce a curated approval process specifically for Playfund eligibility.
Developers could still publish anything freely, preserving S&box’s openness. However, only projects that pass a quality review by Facepunch would be eligible for Playfund rewards and prominent discovery placement.
This would:
- Keep the platform open to experimentation
- Protect Playfound from being dominated by low-effort content
- Signal a quality standard to players
- Encourage developers to invest in deeper projects
- Help establish a strong long-term identity for S&box
Such a system wouldn’t need to be overly restrictive — even a lightweight curation pass could make a significant difference.
S&box has the potential to become a landmark sandbox platform, not just another content feed optimized for short-term engagement. A curated Playfound tier could help ensure that the ecosystem rewards craftsmanship as much as activity.
Thank you for your time and for building this platform.
