“Minecraft,” a “sandbox” game from 2011, holds the prestigious title of the best-selling video game of all time. “Roblox,” an online gaming platform and game-building system from 2006, has seen a recent resurgence in popularity despite its age and is competing with “Minecraft” and “Fortnite” as one of the most played online games of 2024. Both games transcend generations, which I’ve seen as someone who has been periodically returning to “Minecraft” ever since third grade and as someone who didn’t hitch a ride on the “Roblox” train until I was in high school. To the average person, comparing the two may seem like comparing apples to apples. But I, a 22-year-old college student who owns no personal gaming system or desktop computer, am clearly the most qualified person to tell you that comparing these two games is really like comparing apples to oranges.
The ultimate appeal of both of these games, in my opinion, is how much freedom you have. The original “Minecraft” game is based on “survival,” but there’s also the option of a “creative” world, where you can build with the full library of “Minecraft’s” blocks and items. You would think that the persistent “blockiness” of the game would confine you, and it can to some extent, but I have still seen genuinely jaw-dropping builds—and it’s even more impressive if someone can do that in survival mode, having to retrieve those resources themself. Even the most basic survival game has some creativity to it because you inevitably need shelter and, honestly, building my little house is one of my favorite parts (I’m just a girl).
“Roblox” is also a very creative game… and simultaneously not. For those unfamiliar, “Roblox” is not just one thing; it’s an endless resource of player-made games, and there are so many that you’re sure to find something you like. I don’t know the first thing about making a game inside of “Roblox,” but the vastness and accessibility of it all is mind-blowing to me. That being said, if you aren’t a game creator, the game you’re playing exists within the confines of its creator’s choices. If you want to feel like you have endless possibilities, it’s going to cost you, which brings us to our next comparison.
The cost associated with video/online games is an unavoidable part of the conversation. It’s perhaps one of the most money-consuming hobbies, even with the decrease in physical media. This is one of the major ways that I think these games compare.
“Minecraft” has consistently been a relatively affordable game compared to others, currently sitting at $29.99. After that initial purchase, you’re basically set. As far as I’m aware, “Minecraft” had no in-game purchases for a long time up until recent updates. You can now buy things like skins/clothes using purchased “Minecoins,” but it’s hardly necessary. There are massive online databases with free skins you can download, and you can even make your own—how we did it in the good ol’ days. There are also other in-app purchases nowadays, but I’ll admit that I’m an old fart and don’t know much about them.
“Roblox” makes quite the interesting comparison to “Minecraft’s” model. Downloading the game is entirely free, and you can have a legitimately fun time without ever spending a cent. That being said, they sure make it difficult to keep it that way. Similar to the “Minecoin,” system, “Roblox’s” economy operates on “Robux” that can be redeemed for a variety of things. Without “Robux,” the customization of your avatar is extremely limited, and you’re left to watch other players run around in their dazzling drippiness. In a lot of “Roblox” games, there’s content that can only be accessed through purchase, and you’re bound to feel left out. I’ll admit it: I was part of the “Dress to Impress” epidemic. I never bought the VIP pass, but I was tempted numerous times. I was insistent on being high-ranking without ever spending a dime, but sometimes those VIP outfits and makeup looks just cannot be matched. But I’m an adult with my own source of income, so what does this mean for kids playing these games?
“Minecraft” is considered to be suitable for ages 7+ to 13+, and the variety of “Roblox” games ranges from all ages to 17+ depending on the content. This is all to say that a large percentage of the players are children.
Kids don’t understand money in the same way that my adult self does when I’m restraining myself from that measly $10 VIP purchase. There’s nothing wrong with this, it’s just a matter of fact, and the fact is that kids want EVERYTHING.
The economy of “Roblox” inevitably leads to hundreds of “Mommy, can I have this?” questions every time the game is opened—or you end up as the unlucky parent with a $500 “Robux” charge on your card that your kid didn’t ask to use in the first place. The feeling of wanting to have what everyone else has doesn’t go away in adulthood, but kids have yet to understand why that can’t encompass every single purchasable item on “Roblox.”
In contrast, I don’t feel like this same trend carries over into “Minecraft.” When I was first playing, I only ever had to ask my parents for that one initial purchase. I can’t speak to how this has changed for today’s generation of kids with the new in-game purchases, but I still hold the opinion that your enjoyment of “Minecraft” is hardly going to vary if you pay nothing but the initial cost. Unless I missed an update, every player has access to the same items and blocks as the next player. Perhaps it’s this near-level playing field that allowed the game to become as popular as it has.
There are numerous other ways I could compare these games (don’t get me started on online interaction with other players), but these feel like the most important ones to me. If you couldn’t tell, my heart is always going to find its home in the nostalgia of “Minecraft,” but I’d be a hypocrite to deny my occasional fixation on “Roblox” as well. But hey, would they be making an (albeit horrid) movie adaptation of “Minecraft” if it weren’t superior?
