Jump to content

Apple boots Fortnite off the App Store


Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Gabe said:

 

For the first bit, don't the exclusivity agreements mandate that Epic get the full sale value for x number of copies in exchange for the up-front payment? Less risk for the devs if it is a bomb, of course.

 

For the second bit, do you have any citations for that? Genuinely interested to see how games on the Epic store are performing.

Not that I’m aware of. From what I know it’s very similar to the same deal that Microsoft

would cut if your game was going to Game

Pass for example. So a big lump sum up front with zero risk. 

 

Nothing immediately to hand but off the top of my head both the latest Metro and Borderlands have broken previous entries records when it comes to launch numbers on Epic

despite Gamer boycotts for both. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Dirty Harry Potter said:

Epic customer support are a complete shower of c*nts - on the occasions I have dealt with them. Absolutely infuriating, ignorant imbeciles.

 

And on that basis, fuck them.

 

As long as they keep paying their lawyers, because I feel this is bigger than Epic. But Jim who wrote that obscure app which has grossed $17 in 3 years can't afford those lawyers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dirty Harry Potter said:

Epic customer support are a complete shower of c*nts - on the occasions I have dealt with them. Absolutely infuriating, ignorant imbeciles.

 

And on that basis, fuck them.


I think we might be finding the basis of our corporate biases, because by far the worst customer service experiences I’ve ever had were all with Microsoft. Full on, I thought I was the customer how can you be being this rude to me stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HarryBizzle said:

Oh, ok. But are Epic still able to maintain UE for iOS?

 

Yep. Epic's dev accounts for UE development are still active (different accounts apparently), but Epic's accounts for actual gamedev are closed, so any other Epic games as well as Fortnight can no longer be updated. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

That's really interesting.

 

It's all true, of course, but I never expected the House to have the balls to point it out.

 

Whether it leads to action is another matter.

 

It's definitely something that both Epic and the EU can refer to in their court cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some more from the findings.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/6/21504814/congress-antitrust-report-house-judiciary-committee-apple-google-amazon-facebook

 

Quote

Our investigation revealed an alarming pattern of business practices that degrade competition and stifle innovation,” said committee member Val Demings (D-FL). “Competition must reward the best idea, not the biggest corporate account. We will take steps necessary to hold rulebreakers accountable.”
 

The majority’s report lays out a number of concrete policy recommendations, which, taken together, would drastically change how the tech industry operates. It urges Congress to consider passing commercial nondiscrimination rules that would make large companies offer equal terms to companies selling products and services on their platforms. It recommends barring certain dominant platforms from competing in “adjacent lines of business” where they’d have a huge advantage.

 

“To put it simply, companies that once were scrappy, underdog startups that challenged the status quo have become the kinds of monopolies we last saw in the era of oil barons and railroad tycoons,” the report says. “By controlling access to markets, these giants can pick winners and losers throughout our economy. They not only wield tremendous power, but they also abuse it by charging exorbitant fees, imposing oppressive contract terms, and extracting valuable data from the people and businesses that rely on them.”

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a very detailed walkthrough of the ruling on the injunction. It's interesting, the judge is very knowledgeable about the game industry which doesn't work well for Epic as she's fully aware of the impact breaking up apple's walled garden would have on Nintendo or Sony, for example. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

obviously they not commented on the economics of it, but wonder how much actual revenue that is costing Apple.

 

they state majority of apps will be in the lower tier, but still keeps them taking that sweet 30% from the whales that hoover up a lot of the spend going on.

 

its a PR move isn't it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if it's a PR move then it's better than this from Sweeney. 

 

https://techcrunch.com/2020/11/18/epic-games-founder-tim-sweeney-likens-fight-against-apple-to-fight-for-civil-rights/amp/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly90LmNvLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAABEtIoujhIukaQPgnwbuBFdLctAljGMrXOoYU7TSBamQ2PEW5qdbt5M4FD3AXkFbUcWPXkdI3bqfIHfpVcFSx4kFP6Bd3fhtZkLQhhJ_-QrM1opZ1sQxOOuK2RS-vVKvNiDpS3ya1X7gioV8sIFTh6sFsD4ZfpzrBAeiReUQF20B&__twitter_impression=true

 

Quote

Said Sweeney: It’s everybody’s duty to fight. It’s not just an option that somebody’s lawyers might decide, but it’s actually our duty to fight that. If we had adhered to all of Apple’s terms and, you know, taken their 30% payment processing fees and passed the cost along to our customers, then that would be Epic colluding with Apple to restrain competition on iOS and to inflate prices for consumers. So going along with Apple’s agreement is what is wrong. And that’s why Epic mounted a challenge to this, and you know you can hear of any, and [inaudible] to civil rights fights, where there were actual laws on the books, and the laws were wrong. And people disobeyed them, and it was not wrong to disobey them because to go along with them would be collusion to make them status quo.”

Good god man. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, RubberJohnny said:

Eh? Apples decision to reduce their take basically vindicates Sweeney, painting it as a 'PR move' rather than a major concession seems a bit daft.

 

But then the anti-Epic lot are a bit deranged.


It vindicates the PR bullshit Sweeny pretended was why they’re doing this without actually offering Epic what they want. If you buy his argument that he’s fighting for the little guy, then he’s won and should stop trying to also fight for himself to make even more money exploiting children. Unless of course that reasoning was just PR bullshit. Which is what makes it an excellent PR move on Apple’s part.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think on some level Sweeney is genuine about wanting iOS to be an open platform like the PC.

 

I think everyone understands that at some point not too far in the future consumer Mac is finally going away, and whatever Surface Pro-ish iPad/MacBook hybrid (running iPadOS) Apple offer to replace it is going to need to work as a general purpose computing platform to be viable, which means opening up iOS to some degree. Sweeney is just trying to make this happen faster.

 

However, I think some of the other members of this coalition of unhappy iOS developers (e.g., the basecamp guys) are acting fully out of self-interest. Their argument goes further than Sweeney, essentially saying that Apple shouldn't be able to set any guidelines which obviously wouldn't be workable.

 

The smart thing for Sweeney to have said in reaction to this development would be to paint it as vindicating their lawsuit. It is after all the first time that Apple have budged on iOS tax (other than incentives for subscriptions) in the past decade. Possibly there's a worry that saying anything that could be construed as being satisfied with Apple making a positive change would weaken their legal argument, idk.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DukeOfEarlsfield said:

In what way does it do this?

 

Apple have moved on the 30% issue after all the weird Steam fanboys insisting it was necessary, and that lower percentage cuts weren't sustainable.

 

This represents a big cut to 98% of developers on the platform, that's significant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, RubberJohnny said:

Apple have moved on the 30% issue after all the weird Steam fanboys insisting it was necessary, and that lower percentage cuts weren't sustainable.

Was 30% ever "the issue"? It's seems "It's my platform and I'll charge what I want to" is the issue.

 

Apple think they can charge whatever they like to allow people access to their customers. Epic think they shouldn't be allowed to charge anything and that Epic can have free (in both senses of the word) access to Apple customers.

 

Apple newest PR move (it may affect 95% of iOS developers but according to the New York Times it's going to affect less than 5% of App Store revenue) doesn't change that at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, DukeOfEarlsfield said:

Was 30% ever "the issue"? It's seems "It's my platform and I'll charge what I want to" is the issue.

 

The 30% is the complaint they've lodged against Apple and Google, the opening up stuff was only about Apple, which makes it seems like less of a core concern, and it always came off a thing that would be dropped to compromise at your truer position.

 

Quote

Apple newest PR move (it may affect 95% of iOS developers but according to the New York Times it's going to affect less than 5% of App Store revenue) doesn't change that at all.

 

It changes a lot for those smaller developers!

 

It really feels like a lot of these takes must be coming from this internet bubble derangement because I can't see how people would approach this from the angle of "fuck those guys not making much money, they should get shit all!"

 

The default position should be that it's a welcome move, not bemoaning it because you don't like Tim Sweeney.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, whatever people think about Epic/Sweeney or even Apple, this is a positive move for small developers and represents a significant saving for them. Who cares how little it impacts Apple's bottom line, it's still a benefit for most devs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, MK-1601 said:

However, I think some of the other members of this coalition of unhappy iOS developers (e.g., the basecamp guys) are acting fully out of self-interest. Their argument goes further than Sweeney, essentially saying that Apple shouldn't be able to set any guidelines which obviously wouldn't be workable.

 

No actually says that, and companies are absolutely right to point out the ask Apple makes is excessive and an abuse of monopoly power. 

 

Plus why shouldn't they argue from their own self interest?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.