Epic Games Sues Apple

Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
593
It's like going to a stadium or theater. You have to buy their overpriced junk if you're hungry or thirsty. Difference being that it's not for one night but for you're entire use of the phone. Also like a douchebag homeowners association that add negligible value to homes. You have to use their materials if you want to make a nice deck.

Any ways, have all real monopolies of times past had the profit margin that Apple has? I don't know the answer but they make so much money getting away with it. I think if any company that has an easy time extracting money out of people's wallets, then they don't need help from apologists trying to defend their way of doing business. Most companies don't have it so easy. Id rather have economy that is more balanced without so much of our money getting dumped into obscene profits. You know, where competition wins and money you spend actually feeds someone else's mouths.
 
D

Deleted member 243478

Guest
It's like going to a stadium or theater. You have to buy their overpriced junk if you're hungry or thirsty. Difference being that it's not for one night but for you're entire use of the phone. Also like a douchebag homeowners association that add negligible value to homes. You have to use their materials if you want to make a nice deck.

Any ways, have all real monopolies of times past had the profit margin that Apple has? I don't know the answer but they make so much money getting away with it. I think if any company that has an easy time extracting money out of people's wallets, then they don't need help from apologists trying to defend their way of doing business. Most companies don't have it so easy. Id rather have economy that is more balanced without so much of our money getting dumped into obscene profits. You know, where competition wins and money you spend actually feeds someone else's mouths.

See this is the part that peeves me off about all this, you are all targeting Apple saying they have an easy time extracting money from your wallets... Epic are the ones syphoning money from its users through dirty tactics that are about as close to peer pressure laced with gambling for kids as you can get. Apple are just taking their commission because you decide to do such deals with Epic through Apples platforms, utilising their infrastructure.

The sale is between you and Epic in this case, Apple are just providing one of many platforms available on an open market. Don't like the limited options on iOS? Then learn how to be a grown up and make smart buying decisions and choose a product that fits your needs.
 
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
593
See this is the part that peeves me off about all this, you are all targeting Apple saying they have an easy time extracting money from your wallets... Epic are the ones syphoning money from its users through dirty tactics that are about as close to peer pressure laced with gambling for kids as you can get. Apple are just taking their commission because you decide to do such deals with Epic through Apples platforms, utilising their infrastructure.

The sale is between you and Epic in this case, Apple are just providing one of many platforms available on an open market. Don't like the limited options on iOS? Then learn how to be a grown up and make smart buying decisions and choose a product that fits your needs.
Easy man on this "you and Epic" stuff. I don't buy Apple or Epic. Epic does some douchebag moves too. But it's like two football teams I hate playing each other. One will lose which is good. Epic is taking actions to level the playing field. If every successful company were like Apple it would be a terrible situation for the consumer. Any time a chip gets knocked off the system the better for the consumer when other companies give up on the "walled garden" approach if Apple can get taken down a notch. Too much money on few places.

Know what? I'll rejoice when someone can take a chip out of this microtransaction monster that Epic and EA feast off of. If Epic wins vs apple and somehow it backfires into a chain of events hurting Epic's walled garden of micro purchases I'd laugh with tears.

Come on man if N Korea and China duked it out tell me you wouldn't at least grin
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
6,957
Easy man on this "you and Epic" stuff. I don't buy Apple or Epic. Epic does some douchebag moves too. But it's like two football teams I hate playing each other. One will lose which is good. Epic is taking actions to level the playing field. If every successful company were like Apple it would be a terrible situation for the consumer. Any time a chip gets knocked off the system the better for the consumer when other companies give up on the "walled garden" approach if Apple can get taken down a notch. Too much money on few places.
The Apple App Store isn't anti-consumer, it's quite the opposite. You could argue that it's bad for any and all forms of business to business transaction, but in terms of transparency for the user and/or harm to the user, there is none. No more than Steam taking a 30% cut when you buy a game from them (that game is $59.99 regardless of where it's sold). Or a company like Best Buy or Walmart taking 40% or more cut when you buy things at their store (for plenty of high margin items. In fact certain things can far exceed a 40% margin. Selling soda from a fountain in restaurants as an example can be a 10x margin which is 1000% increase. That is to say 10 cents worth of water and syrup being sold for at least a dollar). Costs are what they are to the consumer, what restaurants are "making off of" Coca-Cola isn't relevant. It's only relevant from business to business.

In fact, like Steam, you can make a case that Apple is pro-consumer. They make it so consumers don't have to trust semi-sketchy app developers with credit card information. They're the ones that do all the service and support for the app store. And do all the returns. Regardless of who the app seller is there is clarity for the consumer what all the rules are. They do a reasonably good job at keeping off every form of malware/spyware. As well as ensuring that all apps meet at least a minimum standard. For the consumer all of these things are welcomed and good. Especially for people that know very little about the technology in their hand.

You can actually also make the case that Apple is also pro-business as well. I would argue that even with the 30% "loss" the App Store has and is worth it for most businesses. Clearly and definitely as people continue to code in Swift and produce a multitude of apps - as it is highly profitable to do so. But that's a much longer breakdown for another post.

Know what? I'll rejoice when someone can take a chip out of this microtransaction monster that Epic and EA feast off of. If Epic wins vs apple and somehow it backfires into a chain of events hurting Epic's walled garden of micro purchases I'd laugh with tears.

Come on man if N Korea and China duked it out tell me you wouldn't at least grin
Well, without getting too political it depends on if you care about humanity. Or more to the point if anyone you know or love is either North Korean or Chinese or otherwise lives in those two countries. I've probably had more interesting conversations with people of Taiwanese and Chinese decent over the past several months about the state of communism and how that relates to Hong Kong (protests) and Taiwan (sovereignty). Turns out just like everywhere else you can dislike your government but love your people and your country. I'd say looking forward to anyone going to war and the cost of life given up for causes not in the interest of the people is never good. Regardless of current relations with the United States or any country for that matter.

Businesses are an entirely different thing. It's too bad that people can't be neutral about them I suppose anymore than they can be about countries.
 

SnowBeast

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 3, 2003
Messages
1,306
Can Epic do something important like remake the original Unreal in the new Unreal Engine. That would be nice.
 
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
593
The Apple App Store isn't anti-consumer, it's quite the opposite. You could argue that it's bad for any and all forms of business to business transaction, but in terms of transparency for the user and/or harm to the user, there is none. No more than Steam taking a 30% cut when you buy a game from them (that game is $59.99 regardless of where it's sold). Or a company like Best Buy or Walmart taking 40% or more cut when you buy things at their store (for plenty of high margin items. In fact certain things can far exceed a 40% margin. Selling soda from a fountain in restaurants as an example can be a 10x margin which is 1000% increase. That is to say 10 cents worth of water and syrup being sold for at least a dollar). Costs are what they are to the consumer, what restaurants are "making off of" Coca-Cola isn't relevant. It's only relevant from business to business.

In fact, like Steam, you can make a case that Apple is pro-consumer. They make it so consumers don't have to trust semi-sketchy app developers with credit card information. They're the ones that do all the service and support for the app store. And do all the returns. Regardless of who the app seller is there is clarity for the consumer what all the rules are. They do a reasonably good job at keeping off every form of malware/spyware. As well as ensuring that all apps meet at least a minimum standard. For the consumer all of these things are welcomed and good. Especially for people that know very little about the technology in their hand.

You can actually also make the case that Apple is also pro-business as well. I would argue that even with the 30% "loss" the App Store has and is worth it for most businesses. Clearly and definitely as people continue to code in Swift and produce a multitude of apps - as it is highly profitable to do so. But that's a much longer breakdown for another post.


Well, without getting too political it depends on if you care about humanity. Or more to the point if anyone you know or love is either North Korean or Chinese or otherwise lives in those two countries. I've probably had more interesting conversations with people of Taiwanese and Chinese decent over the past several months about the state of communism and how that relates to Hong Kong (protests) and Taiwan (sovereignty). Turns out just like everywhere else you can dislike your government but love your people and your country. I'd say looking forward to anyone going to war and the cost of life given up for causes not in the interest of the people is never good. Regardless of current relations with the United States or any country for that matter.

Businesses are an entirely different thing. It's too bad that people can't be neutral about them I suppose anymore than they can be about countries.
The other companies who take cut need to because they have overhead, example Walmart being brick and mortar and it's not just unnecessary overhead if people rely on those store fronts. The proof of in the pudding: profit margins. Apple found a way to extract way too much for so little business effort. Imagine if every big company could do that. Not good for us.

Look Apple can do good too, in addition to what you said they have been real good about not tracking personal data and sharing it. My point is that letting tech companies create walled gardens is a huge cash cow, as business practice will be a terrible thing to promote for the future of the economy. That if everyone else succeeds by operating like an Apple or an Epic hurt the consumer in the end because prices get inflated so bad with little money recycling back to the peasant class.

As for war, I wasn't implying people dying in war is good but rather bad governments hurting other bad governments. I was trying to make the point about when one one evil regime making things tough on another evil regime, in and of itself is, not a bad thing. In this case 'evil' is an analogy for a business practice, and less so the company themselves.
 

deruberhanyok

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 22, 2004
Messages
1,925
The other companies who take cut need to because they have overhead, example Walmart being brick and mortar and it's not just unnecessary overhead if people rely on those store fronts.

do you seriously think there’s no overhead involved in developing, maintaining and upgrading a software deployment infrastructure?

like the Apple developer relations team, customer support for devs, developer conferences, staff to write API documentation and other docs used by developers, equipment and bandwidth costs, staff at Datacenters, colocation facilities, software licensing, internal R&D, IT and devops personnel - all that stuff is free? Those people work for free?

just because Apple is good at what they do and they’re making massive profit off of it doesn’t mean they’re doing something wrong. It means they have a good business model.
 

Axman

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
7,005
do you seriously think there’s no overhead involved in developing, maintaining and upgrading a software deployment infrastructure?
Yeah that's not relevant since Epic (among others) are saying they *shouldn't* use this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aegir
like this
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
593
do you seriously think there’s no overhead involved in developing, maintaining and upgrading a software deployment infrastructure?

like the Apple developer relations team, customer support for devs, developer conferences, staff to write API documentation and other docs used by developers, equipment and bandwidth costs, staff at Datacenters, colocation facilities, software licensing, internal R&D, IT and devops personnel - all that stuff is free? Those people work for free?

just because Apple is good at what they do and they’re making massive profit off of it doesn’t mean they’re doing something wrong. It means they have a good business model.
Still a negligible overhead as far as percentages go. Profits wouldn't be so high in a system that doesn't limit you in to proprietary lockdowns. Profit often equals finding clever ways to limit competition.
 

Lakados

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
3,613
Fun fact about Apples payment systems that pisses off a lot of people, mostly the ones trying to track you. Apple scrambles you’re CC data and changes your number during the transaction, it’s to prevent anything from observing the transaction from getting your actual info when using it for Tap pay. All purchases through the store are similarly encrypted and only register as an Apple purchase, it really annoys entities that want your data on your spending habits because Apple doesn’t share...
 

GoodBoy

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
1,995
11 pages of arguments and what is and isn't a monopoly...

Let me repeat:
Epic is suing both Apple and Google play stores.

They are suing because each store takes a % of all in-app transactions. Fortnight is billions a year, Apple and Google getting a piece of it. Epic doesn't want to pay it, so in violation of their agreements with both stores, they built an in-app payment process that bypasses the Apple and Google stores, therefore Apple and Google getting nothing of those sales. Result: Both Apple and Google pulled the app. Epic put it in their app knowing it violated the terms of service they have with each store. Now they are suing because their app is offline (or at least no longer in the store).

Fuck Epic...

Epic broke their contracts with both Google and Apple.

People think Epic is somehow doing this for them, or is on their side.. this is all about their own coffers. Greedy Epic wants to be even more greedy. They've seen $big$$$$$$ with Fortnite. All sense is gone out the window, all respect for legality or the rule of law, gone. Money. money, my fucking money!

This is what's going on in their heads. They don't give a shit about: you, "fair practices", monopolies, anti-trust, anti-competitive.

They are already being anti-competitive themselves with their paid exclusives.

They are being greedy with their Fortnite money. That is ALL this is about. Anyone who thinks otherwise: you are deluding yourself.

Fuck Epic, fuck their exclusives.

I hope when they lose their lawsuit, they have to pay Apple and Googles' lawyer expenses. (They can afford it)
 

travm

Gawd
Joined
Feb 26, 2016
Messages
831
Also, people bring up Microsoft in these discussion, and they absolutely did and still do have a monopoly, and they basically got a slap on the wrist.

They put in a popup to choose a browser for a short while. Now they are back to their old tricks, reinstalling Edge and putting ads in the Start menu. No one seems to care anymore.
My opinion on that is, if you're dumb enough to not realize there are alternatives you can just, you know, install. Then suffer with edge.
 

odditory

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
6,482
Epic broke their contracts with both Google and Apple.
Tim Sweeney's complaint about Google/Android is particularly hilarious, because there Epic already has a sideloadable EGS store on Android where he keeps 100% of the Fortnite hat money, but that's still not good enough. He actually complains that "everyone just ends up downloading the Play Store version of Fortnite".

In other words, even if Apple lost their minds and undermined iOS security by opening it to a sideloadable EGS, that still wouldn't be good enough for Tim. He wants EGS to reside rent-free inside both of these companies' app stores, AND keep 100% of the virtual hat profits extracted from little kids.

People think Epic is somehow doing this for them, or is on their side.. this is all about their own coffers. Greedy Epic wants to be even more greedy. They've seen $big$$$$$$ with Fortnite. All sense is gone out the window, all respect for legality or the rule of law, gone. Money. money, my fucking money!

What's actually refreshing - and restores my faith in humanity somewhat - is that Fortnite players aren't buying it. The people Tim believed he could gaslight into thinking Apple was responsible for taking Fortnite away, they all very clearly understand it was Epic's doing alone, and are not buying the propaganda. This seems to be Tim's biggest miscalculation in this whole mess - people are seeing the bad faith play for what it is.
 
Last edited:

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
11,371
Tim Sweeney's complaint about Google/Android is particularly hilarious, because there Epic already has a sideloadable EGS store on Android where he keeps 100% of the Fortnite hat money, but that's still not good enough. He actually complains that "everyone just ends up downloading the Play Store version of Fortnite".

In other words, even if Apple lost their minds and undermined iOS security by opening it to a sideloadable EGS, that still wouldn't be good enough for Tim. He wants EGS to reside rent-free inside both of these companies' app stores, AND keep 100% of the virtual hat profits extracted from little kids.

That is because he wants lower fees for everyone, everywhere. If the majority download from the Play Store then they're still paying a 30% cut.

You can say it is a fool's errand because it probably is. I can see a 20% fee but at some point the upkeep costs climb up there and they still need to make a profit to. If you're a hyper basic client on PC the cost isn't much, but something like the iOS app store which is a lot more secure and deals with far more volume is going to cost more to maintain than something like the Besthada launcher.
 

odditory

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
6,482
That is because he wants lower fees for everyone, everywhere. If the majority download from the Play Store then they're still paying a 30% cut.
Tim wants more money for Epic. Full stop. All the other "lower fees for everyone" bullshit is a red herring.

And I would say he's completely justified on that stance if he was honest - he's the CEO of a company and that's his job to get more money for his company. But the dancing around with propaganda like "this is everyone's fight" and "the world is at stake" is where it gets into eye-roll territory and makes him so mockworthy. His childish comments on twitter over time expose who he really is and what it's really about.
 
Last edited:

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
11,371
Tim wants more money for Epic. Full stop. All the other "lower fees for everyone" bullshit is a red herring.

And I would say he's completely justified on that stance if he was honest - he's the CEO of a company and that's his job to get more money for his company. But the dancing around with propaganda like "this is everyone's fight" and "the world is at stake" is where it gets into eye-roll territory and makes him so mockworthy. His childish comments on twitter over time expose who he really is and what it's really about.

Sounds like you've never met an idealist before.

This move is idiotic from a money making perspective, because Epic's chance of changing anything is slim to none. These are the actions of someone who has strong ideals and money to squander in a futile attempt to change anything. This is a bit different from say, Newell, who has the sense to not jeopardize his company in pointless struggles but who also drops commentary signalling what helps his bottom line or what he sees opposing it (Microsoft / Win 8, and now Sony's investment in Epic).
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
6,957
The other companies who take cut need to because they have overhead, example Walmart being brick and mortar and it's not just unnecessary overhead if people rely on those store fronts. The proof of in the pudding: profit margins. Apple found a way to extract way too much for so little business effort. Imagine if every big company could do that. Not good for us.
If you don't think that every brick and mortar has absurd profit margins, you're out of your mind. The Waltons and Walmart have used their business model to decimate small business across America, while pocketing the maximum for themselves.

And again, you didn't address the main point which is that this isn't anti-consumer. Just like that Walmart example above, Walmart's pricing and the way they do business in fact benefit the consumer. You can argue they do things that are bad for other businesses, but bad for us? No. They drive costs down and make it possible to buy things for the cheapest cost possible.

More to the point: talking about Apple's relationship to businesses, it's a net positive. What do you think? Would every single one of those million+ app developers prefer the App Store, or would they like to go back to selling physical media inside of a brick and mortar with all the difficulty in distribution and greater cut that imposes? So it's okay for a brick and mortal to charge more "because they need it", but Apple charging less and getting more money into the pockets of app developers, giving them access to billions of users through a search engine (as opposed to maybe a thousand or two through a b&m per store), handling all of their accounting, web services (essentially making it so they don't even need a website or payment system), accounting, et al is also doing significantly more for app developers while costing them zero upfront and far less overall - is somehow worse for them? Can you not even see how that is an absurd backwards argument that doesn't make sense?

If you are a one person dev team it's far more viable to develop something for the app store and make a ton of cash far more than developing for virtually any other platform and everything that entails. If that wasn't the case then every one of these devs would simply setup their own website (which by the way is an entirely different skillset, you'd better have a top flight design if you want to convince people to hand their money to some random developer), own payment system, figure out where they can store repos (bandwidth etc), do their own marketing - etc. But do you casually want to guess which one is the greater opportunity with the much bigger payoff? How about this even more directly: which do you think pays more: the Apple App Store or side loading apps and charging for them on Android? Android has the much bigger market share. I don't even have to look this info up, I know devs are making way more money on the App store than the sideloading through Android. Again, the App Store is 100% a net positive for devs (especially considering it versus brick and mortar and the costs associated with that), especially small devs. The only devs that would benefit from their own infrastructure isn't the little guy, it's people like Amazon, Netflix, Epic, etc - that want to increase their billions.

Look Apple can do good too, in addition to what you said they have been real good about not tracking personal data and sharing it. My point is that letting tech companies create walled gardens is a huge cash cow, as business practice will be a terrible thing to promote for the future of the economy. That if everyone else succeeds by operating like an Apple or an Epic hurt the consumer in the end because prices get inflated so bad with little money recycling back to the peasant class.

Again, Apple is making it possible to be a one person dev team and have that be your living. Tell me other methods of being able to do that? Especially ones with incredibly low barriers to entry and essentially no upfront cost other than a dev account?

Let me put this another way, even only talking about the big billion dollar businesses like say Netflix, even they choose to be on the App Store. Why? Because they make more money than without it. If you want to get to the brass tacks of only talking about money - there is far more money for everyone with the app store than without it.

You keep bringing up Apple having a cash cow, but the truth is each of those devs are still making 70%. Their own veritable cash cows.

As for war, I wasn't implying people dying in war is good but rather bad governments hurting other bad governments. I was trying to make the point about when one one evil regime making things tough on another evil regime, in and of itself is, not a bad thing. In this case 'evil' is an analogy for a business practice, and less so the company themselves.
Regime's are nothing without their people. It is the old and grey headed often sending the young off to war and die for their own benefit.
 
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
593
If you don't think that every brick and mortar has absurd profit margins, you're out of your mind. The Waltons and Walmart have used their business model to decimate small business across America, while pocketing the maximum for themselves.

And again, you didn't address the main point which is that this isn't anti-consumer. Just like that Walmart example above, Walmart's pricing and the way they do business in fact benefit the consumer. You can argue they do things that are bad for other businesses, but bad for us? No. They drive costs down and make it possible to buy things for the cheapest cost possible.

More to the point: talking about Apple's relationship to businesses, it's a net positive. What do you think? Would every single one of those million+ app developers prefer the App Store, or would they like to go back to selling physical media inside of a brick and mortar with all the difficulty in distribution and greater cut that imposes? So it's okay for a brick and mortal to charge more "because they need it", but Apple charging less and getting more money into the pockets of app developers, giving them access to billions of users through a search engine (as opposed to maybe a thousand or two through a b&m per store), handling all of their accounting, web services (essentially making it so they don't even need a website or payment system), accounting, et al is also doing significantly more for app developers while costing them zero upfront and far less overall - is somehow worse for them? Can you not even see how that is an absurd backwards argument that doesn't make sense?

If you are a one person dev team it's far more viable to develop something for the app store and make a ton of cash far more than developing for virtually any other platform and everything that entails. If that wasn't the case then every one of these devs would simply setup their own website (which by the way is an entirely different skillset, you'd better have a top flight design if you want to convince people to hand their money to some random developer), own payment system, figure out where they can store repos (bandwidth etc), do their own marketing - etc. But do you casually want to guess which one is the greater opportunity with the much bigger payoff? How about this even more directly: which do you think pays more: the Apple App Store or side loading apps and charging for them on Android? Android has the much bigger market share. I don't even have to look this info up, I know devs are making way more money on the App store than the sideloading through Android. Again, the App Store is 100% a net positive for devs (especially considering it versus brick and mortar and the costs associated with that), especially small devs. The only devs that would benefit from their own infrastructure isn't the little guy, it's people like Amazon, Netflix, Epic, etc - that want to increase their billions.



Again, Apple is making it possible to be a one person dev team and have that be your living. Tell me other methods of being able to do that? Especially ones with incredibly low barriers to entry and essentially no upfront cost other than a dev account?

Let me put this another way, even only talking about the big billion dollar businesses like say Netflix, even they choose to be on the App Store. Why? Because they make more money than without it. If you want to get to the brass tacks of only talking about money - there is far more money for everyone with the app store than without it.

You keep bringing up Apple having a cash cow, but the truth is each of those devs are still making 70%. Their own veritable cash cows.


Regime's are nothing without their people. It is the old and grey headed often sending the young off to war and die for their own benefit.

Man, too much text when all I'm trying to aim for is the point that it's good when anti-competitive hedges get busted. If someone busts Apple's like Epic is trying to do, it's good. If someone tries to bust Epic's then that's good for the consumer as well.

Alright, I'll play with the rest of what you're saying....
1. I'm not trying to say that walmart is better or worse than Apple practices, nor am I saying that it's acceptible for brick and mortar to be greedy, while tech can't. I'm just saying that when there's a huge profit gaps, it would be easy for someone else to undercut the bloat if anti-competitive hedges weren't in place.
2. If a dev finds value in using the Apple's store then use it! Good for them! BTW, the barrier to entry has never been easier for devs. There's a silly amount of cloud services, payment services, 3rd party libraries, almost don't have to write code anymore.... almost. Don't need Apple for that, but if you want Apple, their 30% is of value less so because of their infrastructure, but more so because of the marketing value. Their infrastructure is still of value especially since it's a package deal, but if you take out the marketing factor you can produce the same value for cheaper. Devs should be able to chose if they want that infrastructure. And if Epic thinks they can play hardball and get better rates, then let them. If Epic gets burned trying then I won't shed a tear. Rather it's the trying that can sometimes lead to better results for consumer.

Cash cows aren't evil, it's the fact that government or a TOS would guarantee no competition against it.

Just like brick and mortar needed a challenge to their status quo, same with tech companies too and their established cut. It's a healthy evolution of the market.
 
Last edited:

Nolan7689

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
1,694
Again, Apple is making it possible to be a one person dev team and have that be your living. Tell me other methods of being able to do that? Especially ones with incredibly low barriers to entry and essentially no upfront cost other than a dev account?

Just for random trivia on this, a little game know as Gunpoint was a one man dev team and wildly successful on steam to the point he was able to quit his day job.

I have no clue if he’s still developing or not. This was a few years back.
 

Axman

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
7,005
Well, you don't need Steam to play games on your computer, either.
 

TurboGLH

Gawd
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
671
Sounds like you've never met an idealist before.

This move is idiotic from a money making perspective, because Epic's chance of changing anything is slim to none. These are the actions of someone who has strong ideals and money to squander in a futile attempt to change anything. This is a bit different from say, Newell, who has the sense to not jeopardize his company in pointless struggles but who also drops commentary signalling what helps his bottom line or what he sees opposing it (Microsoft / Win 8, and now Sony's investment in Epic).

Hardly an idealist. It's right in the emails between Sweeney and Apple.

"Epic is requesting that Apple agree in principle to permit Epic to roll out these options for the benefit of all iOS customers.
We hope that Apple will also make these options equally available to all iOS developers"

He wants the deal for them, and if they extended it to others, that's fine too. Hardly going to bat for the small guy. This is clearly about keeping as much $$ in Epics pocket, not about a fight against the tyrant Apple.

Also, just read those all so reasonable options requested above. (This is sarcasm)


1) Competing payment processing options other than Apple payments, without Apple’s fees, in Fortnite
and other Epic Games software distributed through the iOS App Store;
2) A competing Epic Games Store app available through the iOS App Store and through direct installation
that has equal access to underlying operating system features for software installation and update as
the iOS App Store itself has, including the ability to install and update software as seamlessly as the iOS
App Store experience.
 
Last edited:

deruberhanyok

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 22, 2004
Messages
1,925
1) Competing payment processing options other than Apple payments, without Apple’s fees, in Fortnite
and other Epic Games software distributed through the iOS App Store;

Unreasonable. This is asking to use Apple's service without having to pay for it.

2) A competing Epic Games Store app available through the iOS App Store and through direct installation
that has equal access to underlying operating system features for software installation and update as
the iOS App Store itself has, including the ability to install and update software as seamlessly as the iOS
App Store experience.

More reasonable, since it would be Epic's own store and distribution infrastructure. Though as was mentioned if they ever did allow something like this I'd like to see it heavily sandboxed away from everything else.

But, still, this is the real issue:

Tim Sweeney's complaint about Google/Android is particularly hilarious, because there Epic already has a sideloadable EGS store on Android where he keeps 100% of the Fortnite hat money, but that's still not good enough. He actually complains that "everyone just ends up downloading the Play Store version of Fortnite".

In other words, even if Apple lost their minds and undermined iOS security by opening it to a sideloadable EGS, that still wouldn't be good enough for Tim. He wants EGS to reside rent-free inside both of these companies' app stores, AND keep 100% of the virtual hat profits extracted from little kids.

For it to really work they'd have to accept that Fortnite be fully removed from the iOS app store, so they're no longer claiming they should be able to use Apple's services for free (and on Android, removed from the Play Store), and then force every mobile Fortnite player to re-download the game using the EGS instead.

I just don't see how it's "reasonable" to say you should be able to use a service a company provides without paying for it when that company clearly states "this is what it will cost you to use this service." Apple/Google is up-front about the terms of use of the store, it's not like it's a surprise hidden cost for developers.
 

TurboGLH

Gawd
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
671
Unreasonable. This is asking to use Apple's service without having to pay for it.



More reasonable, since it would be Epic's own store and distribution infrastructure. Though as was mentioned if they ever did allow something like this I'd like to see it heavily sandboxed away from everything else.

But, still, this is the real issue:



For it to really work they'd have to accept that Fortnite be fully removed from the iOS app store, so they're no longer claiming they should be able to use Apple's services for free (and on Android, removed from the Play Store), and then force every mobile Fortnite player to re-download the game using the EGS instead.

I just don't see how it's "reasonable" to say you should be able to use a service a company provides without paying for it when that company clearly states "this is what it will cost you to use this service." Apple/Google is up-front about the terms of use of the store, it's not like it's a surprise hidden cost for developers.

I guess I forgot the /s. I think both of Epics requests are unreasonable, but agree that the second one is less so.

I don't like the walled garden, so i don't buy apple. But I can see how quickly things could go bad if Apple was required to host the install for Epics store and then also allow them to have the same level of integration that the app store does.

Besides, it's not like Epic had any security issues with their side loaded install on android (/s)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanwh...ceptable-fortnite-malware-risks/#4291539f508c
 
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
593
SecretStash You seem more level-headed than some others posting here. So what’s your ideal mobile device software market actually look like?
Ha, would require a lot of thought to be perfect, but I'd start with making it easy to do what you want on a device. No lockdowns. Install rival app stores if you want. Make the OS your own playground. And would be really nice not to require DRM launchers like Epic launcher, EA origin launcher, steam, etc...
Launchers aren't bad but making it a DRM gateway to your software would be annoying. At some point maybe people would hate the multiplicity and even open source stuff that is universal, like what GOG is trying to do. But Apple/Google stores can stay too. No need to get rid of it. Let it be preinstalled. Just no need for dev licenses. I don't need a Mac to compile my code. Most people will just use default OS store, but the threat of competition keeps the Google/Apple from thinking they have too much power.

Security would get hairy with too much freedom. Some kind of vetting process should be in the phone. Probably question users before they install random software. Maybe take what Android does and put it on steroids, prompting user to consent to run sensitive permissions at finer granularity. Or just make it harder for dumb users to install software with too many permission requirements. Have some "dev mode" to unlock, where the method is found by searching the web
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
11,371
Hardly an idealist. It's right in the emails between Sweeney and Apple.

"Epic is requesting that Apple agree in principle to permit Epic to roll out these options for the benefit of all iOS customers.
We hope that Apple will also make these options equally available to all iOS developers"

Why did you post a quote that agrees with what I just wrote?

They're not demanding that everyone side loads their apps or creates their own installer, just to give everyone the option.

Obviously an unrealistic hope because Apple will never let that happen unless there is legal action, and that is slim to none.
 
D

Deleted member 243478

Guest
Tim Sweeney's complaint about Google/Android is particularly hilarious, because there Epic already has a sideloadable EGS store on Android where he keeps 100% of the Fortnite hat money, but that's still not good enough. He actually complains that "everyone just ends up downloading the Play Store version of Fortnite".

In other words, even if Apple lost their minds and undermined iOS security by opening it to a sideloadable EGS, that still wouldn't be good enough for Tim. He wants EGS to reside rent-free inside both of these companies' app stores, AND keep 100% of the virtual hat profits extracted from little kids.



What's actually refreshing - and restores my faith in humanity somewhat - is that Fortnite players aren't buying it. The people Tim believed he could gaslight into thinking Apple was responsible for taking Fortnite away, they all very clearly understand it was Epic's doing alone, and are not buying the propaganda. This seems to be Tim's biggest miscalculation in this whole mess - people are seeing the bad faith play for what it is.

Glad to see many people see sense. Supporting a shithead company like Epic who carry out a legal form of gambling on kids while extracting purchases from them through a mix of peer pressure and instant gratification hits.

Personally I hope they stay banned as this form of profiting from gaming should be outright banned by law already.

So did Epic even pass on the 30% saving to Android users who went to the trouble to sideload apps? I bet not.

You know what is reasonable about an open market? Don’t like Apples, Googles fees? Make your own dam mobile platform if you think its that easy. Apple and Google did the grunt work and made these platforms what they are, they deserve to enjoy the fruits of their accomplishments.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

deruberhanyok

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 22, 2004
Messages
1,925
SecretStash er... you basically just described Android, I think? Minus the DRM most devs use these days, but that's nothing the platform developer can control.
 

Tsumi

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
13,424
Just for random trivia on this, a little game know as Gunpoint was a one man dev team and wildly successful on steam to the point he was able to quit his day job.

I have no clue if he’s still developing or not. This was a few years back.

Or you can take a look at FNAF and see what kind of behemoth it has become.
 

odditory

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
6,482
Glad to see many people see sense. Supporting a shithead company like Epic who carry out a legal form of gambling on kids while extracting purchases from them through a mix of peer pressure and instant gratification hits.

Personally I hope they stay banned as this form of profiting from gaming should be outright banned by law already.

So did Epic even pass on the 30% saving to Android users who went to the trouble to sideload apps? I bet not.

You know what is reasonable about an open market? Don’t like Apples, Googles fees? Make your own dam mobile platform if you think its that easy. Apple and Google did the grunt work and made these platforms what they are, they deserve to enjoy the fruits of their accomplishments.
In fairness I don't begrudge Epic for trying to get as much money as they can. They absolutely should since Fortnite won't remain popular forever, and eventually gets replaced by the next thing. It's the way they're going about it that's so boneheaded - like, Homer Simpson hand stuck vending machine level of "What are you doing?" Fortnite players might be on the younger side, but they're apparently not idiots and Epic's bright idea to try to "mobilize" them against Apple somehow has backfired.
 

TurboGLH

Gawd
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
671
Why did you post a quote that agrees with what I just wrote?

They're not demanding that everyone side loads their apps or creates their own installer, just to give everyone the option.

Obviously an unrealistic hope because Apple will never let that happen unless there is legal action, and that is slim to none.

Their request doesn't agree what with you said. Epic asked for the above concessions. Then added they HOPE that apple will extend that to everyone else. .

If it was really about idealism and the principle, they would have asked for everyone, end line
 

cybereality

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
6,850
Well I think the "hope" word was more to be polite. They are not exactly in a position to be demanding things.
 

travm

Gawd
Joined
Feb 26, 2016
Messages
831
I hate Apple, for reasons. Don't ever buy anything they make, again for reasons.

However, they can charge whatever they want for people to access their system. This is insanity and epic can go bankrupt for being stupid enough to think they can bully the owners of the stores.

This whole deal is arrogant a holes who have more money than I can imagine having. I hope they both lose.
 

cybereality

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
6,850
A good chance that nothing happens, except a loss of reputation and the business relationship for Epic.

Apple losing would mean 3rd party app stores, which I agree with in principle but don't think is a great idea in practice.

Even though I use Android, I rarely install raw apks or alternative stores due to the security implications (and yes, there are shady apk stores for sure).

This goes against the whole Apple business model, they will fight tooth and nail and basically spend all their trillions to make sure this doesn't happen.

Or, if Epic wins, Apple would do the bare minimum to comply with the court but in a way that doesn't really help Epic like they want.

I can't see a scenario where this is good for everyone.
 

GoodBoy

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
1,995
Some points to consider for those who think Apple and Googles' 30% cut is too high.

Number of Galaxy 10 smartphones sold: 78 million
Number of iPhone 6,7, and X sold: over 1 billion

That isn't even all of the android devices that can play fortnite.. there's too many vendors to look it all up. Probably another billion or so devices that can play fortnite, maybe more.

That means that agreeing to pay a 30% cut means instant access to a market of more than 2 BILLION people... Obviously they will not all play the game, but that is what 1/3 of THE ENTIRE WORLD, at their fingertips!

There is obvious value in that.

Instant market. HUGE fucking market. A market of consumers who use this "portal" many times per day, every day. So you are in their face. Only a few places to even be concerned about advertising in, so again, easy button. Stores handle the credit card transactions, no risk for your company to expose customer data. This is value for the consumer too. Apple and Google are security conscious companies, who are a lot less likely to leak customer data than friggin Epic, or any average joe blow app-dev who decides "I wanna do what Epic did too!", and set up his own payment portal... yeah, no. They pay for all of the hosting and bandwidth to distribute your product.

And on,
and on.
 
Top