Apple threatens to kill Unreal Engine on iOS, Fornite may never return

[Zodiark1593]

1 minute ago, Arika S said:

I guess Apple is the only company that would be allowed to do this....If this kind of control was exerted over any other OS/platform people would tear them apart. But Apple? Nah.

Game consoles?

[Helpful Tech Witch]

1 minute ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Game consoles?

True.

[mr moose]

8 minutes ago, harryk said:

 

As a consumer I can choose to only buy food from Whole Foods because reasons (doesn't matter why because I'm the consumer making my own choices). Whole Foods only sells high quality organic products because that's their choice as a business. Now if Frito-Lay decides they want to target me and sell me Cheetos they will obviously have to sell them at Whole Foods because I only shop at Whole Foods. However Whole Foods refuses to sell Cheetos because it does not meet their standards, so Frito-Lay will either have to give up, or modify their ways in order to meet Whole Foods's standard.

Now to make the analogy fair,  you have to make it so whole foods has half of the entire market and can by force prevent that market from going anywhere else.  Thus the only way fritto can sell to half the market (not just one person) is to abide the whole foods policies and pay them from their own revenue for any business that occurs through the product after the sale (not just the initial sale).

 

This is why they are calling it a monopoly, because it is not the choice of 1 consumer, it is preventing half the market from being accessible to developers.

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Game consoles?

I personal have no experience with them because I don't buy them nor do I buy games new for them,  But the amount of people who complain and whine about Nintendo et all, I don't think people are letting them off either.   It's just that apple actually have cases against them for it and monopoly is pretty black and white.

[Arika]

1 minute ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Game consoles?

the equivalent would be Sony removing a game from PSN and updating firmware to not allow it to play the disc of a particular game/games because they were in dispute with the developer.

Has never happened. and you can be sure that lawsuits would come down on their head if they try.

 

With consoles you still have options of where to get your game, either from PSN or from one of hundreds of retail stores. Sony doesn't force people to only sell through PSN. sure some games you can ONLY get from the Playstation Store, but that's the developer's choice.

With iOS you HAVE TO sell through the app store, there is no alternative.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Arika S said:

 

With consoles you still have options of where to get your game, either from PSN or from one of hundreds of retail stores. Sony doesn't force people to only sell through PSN. sure some games you can ONLY get from the Playstation Store, but that's the developer's choice.

With iOS you HAVE TO sell through the app store, there is no alternative.

Now that someone has explained the issue with consoles, I don't understand why people keep raising it as some sort of argument, If what you say is true (and I believe it because EB games sells console games (more than pc games)) then they are not the same thing.  It's like arguing conrflakes are unhealthy because weatbix exist.

[divito]

We can lament about the 30% forever, but ultimately, Epic is facing an uphill battle. Given the service and platform that is the Apple app store, they're not required to let anyone use the platform at all if they don't conform to their stipulations. In exchange for the use of its services and access to its customers, 30% is the rate through their payment platform, unless they negotiate something different.

The monopoly argument doesn't really work either, because there are ways around Apple's restrictions, and Android exists, and Fortnite can be played on other platforms. 

[Thaldor]

4 minutes ago, Arika S said:

With consoles you still have options of where to get your game, either from PSN or from one of hundreds of retail stores. Sony doesn't force people to only sell through PSN. sure some games you can ONLY get from the Playstation Store, but that's the developer's choice.

With iOS you HAVE TO sell through the app store, there is no alternative.

AFAIK with consoles while yes, consumer can buy the game as digital from Sony/MS/Nintendo or as physical from whatever store they want. It's still kind of no because I would imagine at least with Sony and Nintendo those physical copies are still made by Sony and Nintendo (as in EA makes a game and sends the master copy to Sony to put on the PSN and to start their factory to print and burn the Blu-Rays which then are most likely directly send to wholesalers and then to the stores).

As a dev you cannot go to a store and buy "Xbox/PS/Switch DVD/BR burning drive", most likely ever since PS1 the discs have physical copyprotections which need special machines/methods to be implemented and so just not any mass discs maker can make those games. Just as (IIRC) to sell your movie on beta you needed to strike a deal with Sony to do so because Sony was the only one making beta-cassettes and so to was only one who was able to manufacture those with your movie in them (this is one reason why beta lost to VHS which was freely manufactured, as in anyone who had the money could buy the machinery and start making VHS-cassettes).

 

So even with physical game discs the console manufacturers still get their cuts and considering the manufacturing and logistics those cuts are probably higher than 30% on the physical game.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

6 minutes ago, divito said:

We can lament about the 30% forever, but ultimately, Epic is facing an uphill battle. Given the service and platform that is the Apple app store, they're not required to let anyone use the platform at all if they don't conform to their stipulations. In exchange for the use of its services and access to its customers, 30% is the rate through their payment platform, unless they negotiate something different.

The monopoly argument doesn't really work either, because there are ways around Apple's restrictions, and Android exists, and Fortnite can be played on other platforms. 

OMFG STOP. We have heard about Android. And there aren't workarounds for most pepole. Plus, the whole problem is that, unlike EVERY OTHER OS (including Mac os) you have multiple options to download a app, but on iOS you are forced to use the app store.

Edit: I just checked and apple shiped 46% of all smartphones shipped in q1 2020. They have over 15% overall market share. 15% of people with smartphones have iphones

[pas008]

5 minutes ago, divito said:

We can lament about the 30% forever, but ultimately, Epic is facing an uphill battle. Given the service and platform that is the Apple app store, they're not required to let anyone use the platform at all if they don't conform to their stipulations. In exchange for the use of its services and access to its customers, 30% is the rate through their payment platform, unless they negotiate something different.

The monopoly argument doesn't really work either, because there are ways around Apple's restrictions, and Android exists, and Fortnite can be played on other platforms. 

 

What is doordashs/uber/etc from Apple 30%

[Kisai]

16 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Now that someone has explained the issue with consoles, I don't understand why people keep raising it as some sort of argument, If what you say is true (and I believe it because EB games sells console games (more than pc games)) then they are not the same thing.  It's like arguing conrflakes are unhealthy because weatbix exist.

Because it's the same argument. There is no alternative Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft store for consoles. If you want to download a game digitally, you can not download an ISO from amazon.com directly to the xbox.  Did you know that the PSN does nothing but send you ISO images of the original games? Suuuurely any digital store can do that too.

 

The physical store is not a question here, a 30% markup on digital is a goldmine and Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft/Sega/Square-Enix/etc would rather you buy everything digitally than buy any physical media because they get 100% (directly) or 70% via digital, rather than the 15-30% they would get from retail, and the actual game devs might only end up with 10% of that.

 

The online platform lets you cut out the publisher and the retail store markups. So next time think about that when you compare prices If the physical disc costs as much as the digital download, then get the physical disc, because you get no benefit to the digital download but you can at least sell the disc later when you're done with it.

 

In case people have goldfish memory, publishers hate used games and also want to get rid of physical discs. 

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2010/05/ea-sports-to-charge-10-to-play-used-games-online/

 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

32 minutes ago, Arika S said:

I guess Apple is the only company that would be allowed to do this....If this kind of control was exerted over any other OS/platform people would tear them apart. But Apple? Nah.

Windows RT. Did anyone tear them apart?

[divito]

8 minutes ago, TheTechWizardThatNeedsHelp said:

OMFG STOP. We have heard about Android. And there aren't workarounds for most pepole. Plus, the whole problem is that, unlike EVERY OTHER OS (including Mac os) you have multiple options to download a app, but on iOS you are forced to use the app store. 

There are lots of exclusive software or games that exist across different platforms. That doesn't make any of them monopolistic or anti-competitive. Yes, some of those suck for consumers who invested in a certain platform, but to say they're anti-competitive is ultimately false.

If you started using a shipping company to send products out, you 1. have to agree to their fee, and 2. agree to their terms. If you turn around and violate one of their terms, they have every right to void your contract. Epic added their own payment processor (violated one of the terms), which let them completely avoid the fee. How or why would they be allowed not pay for access to the app store?

 

There are simply way too many real-world examples that showcase the fallacious nature of this line of thinking.

[mr moose]

Just now, Kisai said:

Because it's the same argument. There is no alternative Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft store for consoles. If you want to download a game digitally, you can not download an ISO from amazon.com directly to the xbox.  Did you know that the PSN does nothing but send you ISO images of the original games? Suuuurely any digital store can do that too.

It's not even close to the same argument.  DO PSN or xbox live take 30% of in-app purchases? Are there options for developers to sell their products to the same market through other venues?  the Answer is yes for most of that.   At least on those other devices developer still hav a choice where they sell they product.

 

 

Just now, Kisai said:

The physical store is not a question here, a 30% markup on digital is a goldmine and Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft/Sega/Square-Enix/etc would rather you buy everything digitally than buy any physical media because they get 100% (directly) or 70% via digital, rather than the 15-30% they would get from retail, and the actual game devs might only end up with 10% of that.

You are still stuck with this concept in your head that the problem is with the initial sale. It is not, it is with in-app purchases and you know it because your response to the argument last time was for developers to not do in-app sales. 

 

 

Just now, Kisai said:

The online platform lets you cut out the publisher and the retail store markups. So next time think about that when you compare prices If the physical disc costs as much as the digital download, then get the physical disc, because you get no benefit to the digital download but you can at least sell the disc later when you're done with it.

 

In case people have goldfish memory, publishers hate used games and also want to get rid of physical discs. 

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2010/05/ea-sports-to-charge-10-to-play-used-games-online/

 

 

As above, you are the master of conflation and ignoring the actual issue.  Stop trying to argue the bits that are not in contention as if that applies to the activity that is in contention.

 

 

[Kisai]

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

You are still stuck with this concept in your head that the problem is with the initial sale. It is not, it is with in-app purchases and you know it because your response to the argument last time was for developers to not do in-app sales. 

 

Please, show me a game you can download DLC for in a retail store. Show me where I can buy Scott Pilgrim vs the World. 

https://delistedgames.com/scott-pilgrim-vs-the-world-the-game/

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Kisai said:

Please, show me a game you can download DLC for in a retail store.

I point out you are still only talking about the initial sale (which is not the problem) and you respond by asking me about an initial sale.

 

 

Please read my posts.

[Kisai]

Just now, mr moose said:

I point out you are still only talking about the initial sale (which is not the problem) and you respond by asking me about an initial sale.

 

 

Please read my posts.

Please look up the game and you will see what I'm talking about.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

2 minutes ago, divito said:

f you started using a shipping company to send products out, you 1. have to agree to their fee, and 2. agree to their terms. If you turn around and violate one of their terms, they have every right to void your contract. Epic added their own payment processor (violated one of the terms), which let them completely avoid the fee. How or why would they be allowed not pay for access to the app store?

Yeah. Epic has abviosusly been waiting for the right time to call bullshit and violate those ToS. What better time to do it than the middle of anti-trust hearings. 

 

Apple is a monopoly. They control their phones in a way that is unprecedented, to the point to where you cannot use your phone to the point that you can with other platforms (we are forgetting windows RT, as everyone seems to, I mean, it's been over 5 years and 8.1rt still hasn't been jailbroken).

 

[Sarra]

I'm watching two entities that I absolutely hate get in a fight. I hope they both lose.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

Just now, Kisai said:

Please look up the game and you will see what I'm talking about.

That doesn't make it less unrelated. Everyone and their mom seems to grapes the fact that the 30% of app sales makes sense, but you obviously don't. We are discussing the fact that the 30% of in app purchaces makes no sense.

[mr moose]

11 minutes ago, TheTechWizardThatNeedsHelp said:

Windows RT. Did anyone tear them apart?

People ripped it apart before it even released, it lived a whole few months and people are still ripping it years later. 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

1 minute ago, Sarra said:

I'm watching two entities that I absolutely hate get in a fight. I hope they both lose.

Why do you absolutely hate both. I get apple, and epic isn't a saint, but they have been making games for decades, and most are pretty good.

[Arika]

7 minutes ago, TheTechWizardThatNeedsHelp said:

Windows RT. Did anyone tear them apart?

do you just say thing and hope they are right?

 

https://www.zdnet.com/article/windows-rt-browser-restriction-sparks-senate-committee-probe/

 

https://www.crn.com.au/news/microsoft-in-surface-rt-class-action-lawsuit-353346

 

Windows RT also barely lasted a year. so it's hardly comparable.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

Just now, mr moose said:

People ripped it apart before it even released, it lived a whole few months and people are still ripping it years later. 

Huh. I still have my surface RT. There isn't a jailbreak for 8.1 yet. Forget iOS being the most sucure, RT is.

[Arika]

1 minute ago, valdyrgramr said:

So, I'm stuck with, "ladies you're both shit." then moving on.

This is my take.

 

Both need their asses kicked for their respective actions.