Epic vs Apple

Also, the Epic Store is the biggest data farming exercise I’ve ever seen, dressed-up in generous give aways. Nothing is ever free.

Whoever wins, we lose.

Trelliz wrote:Whoever wins, we lose.

That's not a growth wrote:

Jenuall wrote:Apple taking a cut of initial sale of an app makes sense, but getting 30% of every transaction within that app after purchase is a bit insane really

While I generally agree with this, my thought then goes "what would then stop them to make their apps free, but then an IAP to 'unlock' the full app" - and then Apple have built all this expensive infrastructure which is providing value but not getting paid for it.

Also it would set a bad president, if stores are forced to be run at a loss it would guarantee this monopoly continues since the barrier to entry would be too high if the only people who can run a store are those who can take the hit.

Getting 30% of all on going payments feels too much - especially for something like Spotify or Netflix that has regular payments. Perhaps it should be similar to credit card processing fees for IAP, which is just a few percent I think.

But I can open any gambling or shopping app on my iPhone and deposit funds into my account or buy anything (including digital goods) through the app using any payment method under the sun and Apple doesn’t get a penny.

Yet, if I’m instead looking to put Vbucks into my Fortnite account, I *have* to pay for them through the App Store.

Apple block buying books through the Kindle app because they have their own bookstore, and even though I can open the Amazon app and buy anything, I *still* can’t buy kindle books on it because they block it.

Similarly, I can’t buy films or TV shows on the Google Play Movies & TV app because they have their own store for that, but I can open the YouTube app and buy them there (which is literally the same service!), but the catch is I have to buy it as an IAP, so Apple get paid again.

And in both these cases I can just open the
Safari app and buy what I want there without Apple seeing any of it.

Jordan UK wrote:Also, the Epic Store is the biggest data farming exercise I’ve ever seen, dressed-up in generous give aways. Nothing is ever free.

Really? I mean, I understand that the point of all those free games is to get people onto the store and to get their contact details, but I'm not sure what other data they're harvesting beyond that. It's not exactly Facebook, is it?

Turns out both of them are bad, who knew??

OrangeRKN wrote:Turns out both of them are bad, who knew??

Sounds like an epic battle

Great video.

I see lots of other app publishers are coming out in support. I know nothing about Epic, but the stranglehold Apple and Google have in this market is incredibly unhealthy.

I thought the 1984 Apple advert piss-take was quite good. They're not exactly the little up-and-comers any more and, in a way, have become exactly what they were fighting against in 1984 (IBM).

Victor Mildew wrote:Sounds like an epic battle

Epic's App Battle is History!

Winckle wrote:

Victor Mildew wrote:Sounds like an epic battle

Epic's App Battle is History!

Good guys bad guys and explosions, as far as the eye can see

Rocsteady wrote:Great video.

I see lots of other app publishers are coming out in support. I know nothing about Epic, but the stranglehold Apple and Google have in this market is incredibly unhealthy.

So is the exploitation of children to keep them spending loads of money to keep buying the latest fortnite skins, so I'm not sure who is the lesser evil here.

That's not a growth wrote:

Jenuall wrote:Apple taking a cut of initial sale of an app makes sense, but getting 30% of every transaction within that app after purchase is a bit insane really

While I generally agree with this, my thought then goes "what would then stop them to make their apps free, but then an IAP to 'unlock' the full app" - and then Apple have built all this expensive infrastructure which is providing value but not getting paid for it.

Also it would set a bad president, if stores are forced to be run at a loss it would guarantee this monopoly continues since the barrier to entry would be too high if the only people who can run a store are those who can take the hit.

Getting 30% of all on going payments feels too much - especially for something like Spotify or Netflix that has regular payments. Perhaps it should be similar to credit card processing fees for IAP, which is just a few percent I think.

Trelliz wrote:

Rocsteady wrote:Great video.

I see lots of other app publishers are coming out in support. I know nothing about Epic, but the stranglehold Apple and Google have in this market is incredibly unhealthy.

So is the exploitation of children to keep them spending loads of money to keep buying the latest fortnite skins, so I'm not sure who is the lesser evil here.

Exploitation is a bit far. Epic are no different than the majority of studios pushing in-game purchases these days. It's the nature of the gaming world these days, unfortunately. However, unlike the others, Epic are using their 'power' to push for change. They take a far smaller cut in their own store so they are in a way more on-side with developers. At least they are trying to change things (even though it benefits them) I guess.

I don’t see how this is a bad thing in any way. Tim Sweeney has been banging on about open platforms for years before Fortnite or the Epic Store were a thing. They at least put their money where their mouth is with the latter and only take 12% of sales rather than 30%. And now they’re risking losing two enormous platforms for their biggest game.

The 30% that Apple and Valve take seems massively disproportionate for the amount of effort they put into the product. They get this because their stores are de facto monopolies, the former because it’s closed and the latter because gamers apparently want very tidy lists of games on one service even if it drives a lack of competition in the market.


Apple’s crappy App Store rules have been under increased scrutiny with the Hey controversy and xCloud and Stadia being told where to go. If this ruckus leads to these things changing, or developers paying less than 30% on the App Store, then it’s good for literally everyone except Apple, so it’s odd to see Epic copping so much flack for this.

Two very shitty companies bickering with each other, but if Epic (and others supporting them) can force some kind of change in Apple's policy, then it could benefit others, so that would be a positive.

twitter.com/Slasher/status/1294073105376333825

JT986M2 wrote:

Trelliz wrote:

Rocsteady wrote:Great video.

I see lots of other app publishers are coming out in support. I know nothing about Epic, but the stranglehold Apple and Google have in this market is incredibly unhealthy.

So is the exploitation of children to keep them spending loads of money to keep buying the latest fortnite skins, so I'm not sure who is the lesser evil here.

Exploitation is a bit far. Epic are no different than the majority of studios pushing in-game purchases these days. It's the nature of the gaming world these days, unfortunately. However, unlike the others, Epic are using their 'power' to push for change. They take a far smaller cut in their own store so they are in a way more on-side with developers. At least they are trying to change things (even though it benefits them) I guess.

It's no less exploitative just because everyone's at it.

Someone needs to go after Apple and their tax simply for existing on their operating system, but the way Epic are positing this as Apple just don't want you to enjoy cool fun Fortnite, they're the big bad corporation, is very much spider-man-meme.jpg.

Knoyleo wrote:

JT986M2 wrote:

Trelliz wrote:

Rocsteady wrote:Great video.

I see lots of other app publishers are coming out in support. I know nothing about Epic, but the stranglehold Apple and Google have in this market is incredibly unhealthy.

So is the exploitation of children to keep them spending loads of money to keep buying the latest fortnite skins, so I'm not sure who is the lesser evil here.

Exploitation is a bit far. Epic are no different than the majority of studios pushing in-game purchases these days. It's the nature of the gaming world these days, unfortunately. However, unlike the others, Epic are using their 'power' to push for change. They take a far smaller cut in their own store so they are in a way more on-side with developers. At least they are trying to change things (even though it benefits them) I guess.

It's no less exploitative just because everyone's at it.

Someone needs to go after Apple and their tax simply for existing on their operating system, but the way Epic are positing this as Apple just don't want you to enjoy cool fun Fortnite, they're the big bad corporation, is very much spider-man-meme.jpg.

I absolutely wouldn’t class Fortnite’s skins and dances as exploitative at all. They’re purely cosmetic, in a game that’s free to play, and with no randomness or anything. You see the item you want for sale in the shop and you buy it. Just because they’re selling an obscene amount of them due to it being the “in thing” doesn’t make it exploitation. In my mind it’s no different than when Coca Cola yo-yos were big for a year when I was young.

There might be something to the artificial sense of scarcity with how the shop rotates items in and out, but the stuff in the shop is normally stuff that was previously in the battle pass, and it’s generally understood that it will come around again and again.