Apple Threatens to Terminate Epic Games' Developer Accounts on August 28

[MacCheetah3]

Hopefully the end result from all of this is preventing Apple from forcing devs or companies to pay Apple 15/30% of their revenue. This would destroy a significant chunk of Apple's revenue, future plans, and send their stock falling but it's only a matter of time til the US gov't steps in. Apple deserves all the bad press it gets over this.

I hope that ( whiny ) developers relying on constant IAPs will look at this and think, "The 30% cut isn't going away, so maybe we need to tweak our revenue model" -- very long short indeed. I know one-time purchase apps aren't really viable in the mobile app context but these in-game currencies and so forth are getting out of hand. Apple may no longer need/should take 30%, however, (the claimed) "free to play" game developers charging for every little thing or you drudge through a slow, limited, and harassed experience is just as or more ridiculous. I recently deleted a game -- which I was willing to be bombarded by routine ads rather than paying regularly for in-game currencies, my normal attitude -- because, whether intentional or just willingly careless UX design, released an update that didn't allow me to return to free, ad-based play once I tried an upgrade. I'm on the verge of deleting another game by that same developer/publisher it too is bombarding me too frequently with "Buy [x]."

Hopefully the end result from all of this is preventing Apple from forcing devs or companies to pay Apple 15/30% of their revenue. This would destroy a significant chunk of Apple's revenue, future plans, and send their stock falling but it's only a matter of time til the US gov't steps in. Apple deserves all the bad press it gets over this.

I hope that ( whiny ) developers relying on constant IAPs will look at this and think, "The 30% cut isn't going away, so maybe we need to tweak our revenue model" -- very long short indeed. I know one-time purchase apps aren't really viable in the mobile app context but these in-game currencies and so forth are getting out of hand. Apple may no longer need/should take 30%, however, (the claimed) "free to play" game developers charging for every little thing or you drudge through a slow, limited, and harassed experience is just as or more ridiculous. I recently deleted a game -- which I was willing to be bombarded by routine ads rather than paying regularly for in-game currencies, my normal attitude -- because, whether intentional or just willingly careless UX design, released an update that didn't allow me to return to free, ad-based play once I tried an upgrade. I'm on the verge of deleting another game by that same developer/publisher it too is bombarding me too frequently with "Buy [x]."

That's completely insane to me and anti-consumer to its core. I really hope Apple loses this battle.

If this is indeed a set rule there really is no problem here.

People might argue that this is abuse of power, but if this is a rule applied to everybody it's good that Apple keeps everybody to the same rules.

From the App Store Guidelines

3.1 Payments

• 3.1.1 In-App Purchase:
  • If you want to unlock features or functionality within your app, (by way of example: subscriptions, in-game currencies, game levels, access to premium content, or unlocking a full version), you must use in-app purchase. Apps may not use their own mechanisms to unlock content or functionality, such as license keys, augmented reality markers, QR codes, etc. Apps and their metadata may not include buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms other than in-app purchase.
  • Apps may use in-app purchase currencies to enable customers to “tip” digital content providers in the app.
  • Any credits or in-game currencies purchased via in-app purchase may not expire, and you should make sure you have a restore mechanism for any restorable in-app purchases.
  • Remember to assign the correct purchasability type or your app will be rejected.
  • Apps may enable gifting of items that are eligible for in-app purchase to others. Such gifts may only be refunded to the original purchaser and may not be exchanged.
  • Apps distributed via the Mac App Store may host plug-ins or extensions that are enabled with mechanisms other than the App Store.
  • Apps offering “loot boxes” or other mechanisms that provide randomized virtual items for purchase must disclose the odds of receiving each type of item to customers prior to purchase.
  • Non-subscription apps may offer a free time-based trial period before presenting a full unlock option by setting up a Non-Consumable IAP item at Price Tier 0 that follows the naming convention: “XX-day Trial.” Prior to the start of the trial, your app must clearly identify its duration, the content or services that will no longer be accessible when the trial ends, and any downstream charges the user would need to pay for full functionality. Learn more about managing content access and the duration of the trial period using Receipts and Device Check.

• 3.1.3(a) “Reader” Apps: Apps may allow a user to access previously purchased content or content subscriptions (specifically: magazines, newspapers, books, audio, music, video, access to professional databases, VoIP, cloud storage, and approved services such as classroom management apps), provided that you agree not to directly or indirectly target iOS users to use a purchasing method other than in-app purchase, and your general communications about other purchasing methods are not designed to discourage use of in-app purchase.
• 3.1.3(b) Multiplatform Services: Apps that operate across multiple platforms may allow users to access content, subscriptions, or features they have acquired in your app on other platforms or your web site, including consumable items in multiplatform games, provided those items are also available as in-app purchases within the app. You must not directly or indirectly target iOS users to use a purchasing method other than in-app purchase, and your general communications about other purchasing methods must not discourage use of in-app purchase.

 

[garylapointe]

You mean like giving Amazon a 50% discount off the 30% store fee?

Rules change, in 2016 Apple started offering a 15% cut for subscription services, previous to that they even offerered it for several types of services.

Perhaps more notably is the change in revenue split: for app developers who have long-term paying subscribers, Apple will only take a 15 percent revenue cut after a year, rather than the standard rev-share plan, in which Apple takes a 30 percent cut and gives the developer 70 percent. And, all types of app makers can now sell their apps as subscriptions. Previously, it was limited to certain types of apps, like cloud-storage apps, or audio and video streaming apps

Apple's new subscription offerings are now available to App Store developers

Last June Apple said it would be changing up its rules around subscription services for App Store developers, giving more of a revenue cut to app makers who maintain long-term subscribers. Now,...

www.theverge.com

 

[borgein]

I wonder if Valve will join suit. They've also been directly impacted by Apple's anti-competitiveness.

Valve charges a fixed 30% cut on Steam for the exact same thing as Apple and Google does.
I don't think they want any part of this. Steam/Valve already fought this game with Epic some years ago, which resulted in all of Epic's games being removed from Steam.

 

[AxiomaticRubric]

Apple is as bad as MS of their era.

The amount of pro-Apple bias, even on a fan site like MR is unbelievable.

The same people would have rooted against the MS monopoly of past, now rooting for the Apple monopoly (cause Apple is somehow their friend).

That Apple can even cut out a company that displeases them shows how artificially locked-down their devices are. No consumer wins from that.

Not this again.... SMH

Explain how is Apple a monopoly, when Android has the most mobile market share, and Windows has the most PC market share???

 

[borgein]

One obvious flaw in this analogy is that the store and the payment processor in this example are often two separate companies.

Apple owns both the App Store and the only payment method you can use in that store.

Apple is the card reader. You can use any credit or debit card as a payment source in the card reader.
I don't see the problem. Do you want to pick between five card readers from different vendors and banks at your local grocery store to?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

A smaller developer would probably have had his account terminated by now.

I think a smaller developer in good standing with lots of happy customers on the App Store would be provided the same result. Because, Epic Games was indeed a developer in good standing like all the others up until their latest stunt.

Now, if this was the first release of a small developer’s first app, then, yeah, I’d imagine it’s safer to just yank the app and have them resubmit a proper version. Actually, a small developer‘s first app may have had more rigorus review since it’s the first one and this type of change may not have even made it through review. There’s a level of trust they can extend to developers in good standing.

 

[mnsportsgeek]

The only way I see Apple bending here is if other big gaming developers pull out. If this creates a domino effect, Apple will respond because Apple likes money.

 

[MagicBoy]

And Apple has even more. Apple at one point had more cash reserves than the entire United States Government. Epic has a market share of 1 billion. Apple has a market share of 2 trillion.

Irrelevant. Epic broke the ToS.

 

[mi7chy]

Apple needs developers more than the other way around. It'll be a dead platform without developers.

 

[garylapointe]

The only way I see Apple bending here is if other big gaming developers pull out. If this creates a domino effect, Apple will respond because Apple likes money.

The issue is that means less money for those developers when they pull out.

I'd love to know how much revenue Epic has lost due to no in-app purchases this past week.
Plus, they lowered prices 20% at their own store, so they're not making as much there either; if I play on iOS, I don't want to put any money in via their site, since the app isn't getting updated anymore...

Also, what's their normal iOS lose a customer add a customer turnover? Because they haven't added any this past week.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

The only way I see Apple bending here is if other big gaming developers pull out. If this creates a domino effect, Apple will respond because Apple likes money.

Just checked top free and paid games and don’t see any of those other developers pulling out. It’s not like we’re talking about AAA games that are in line with what folks expect on consoles and PC. Fortnite’s pretty much alone, everything else is mobile fodder enjoying their 70% cut and don’t have an axe to grind.

 

[Ethosik]

You mean like giving Amazon a 50% discount off the 30% store fee?

You do realize that Prime is a unique situation right? You don't just get streaming with Prime. I believe this is what qualified for the special pricing as it it physical and digital goods with Prime.

 

[corbinwilliams]

Nobody is forcing Epic to be on the App Store except themselves, they are free to walk away at any time.

 

[stlredbird]

The only way I see Apple bending here is if other big gaming developers pull out. If this creates a domino effect, Apple will respond because Apple likes money.

That’s precisely why Apple will never bend in this case. Epic wants them to host their game for free. It’s honestly insane. And most of the time im in the thinking that apple’s own policies have destroyed the potential gaming platform that is iOS. But this stunt Epic pulled is ill-thought out.

 

[4jasontv]

If Epic decide to remove their ios development tools from Apple's servers in a tit for tat move, this could hurt Apple a lot because it would mean 3rd party game developers no longer having access to unreal engine development tools and if game apps in the store can not be updated and as a result start to give gamers problems, customers will stop playing such games which means Apple will not be getting it's 30% cut of in app purchases from gamers.

Granted Epic might be at fault here from breaking the app store T&C's but if Epic fight back hard, Apple in my opinion will be the loser because without Epic's development tools (if Epic decide to pull them from Apple), games in the store will eventually crash because developers will no longer be able to fix problems because the tools to fix it wont be there anymore. Apple losing 30% on every game in app purchase is going to effect Apple more than it will Epic.

Something similar happened with flash. You might say that flash was only good because it was popular. Without iOS it died. If Apple and Google blocks apps made with Unreal than developers might just avoid Unreal to ensure their game is eligible.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Apple needs developers more than the other way around. It'll be a dead platform without developers.

There’s a lot of small developers making, say, up to $500,000 a year that would likely disagree with you. Unless Epic Games or one of the other big ones are going to pay all the small developer’s salaries for a few months while everything gets sorted out, they need the App Store WAY more than Apple needs them to post their app.

 

[Ethosik]

Assuming this goes through, the ramifications are bigger than most people here seem to realize, and would seemingly affect Apple a lot more than Epic. Say goodbye to any new Unreal-based games running on iOS (e.g. Infinity Blade, Injustice 1 and 2, Mortal Kombat, Hello Neighbor, Life Is Strange, etc.) or Mac (e.g. Psychonauts 2, Ark: Survival Evolved, Obduction, Life is Strange 2, etc.). Not to mention saying goodbye to Unreal Engine 5, which was due for release on iOS and Mac next year and would have allowed developers to use the same engine across the next-gen consoles and Mac/iOS. Without it, we'll lose access to a lot of games.

I'm not making a judgment call here about whether Apple is right or wrong, but this is the sort of thing that can easily blow up in Apple's face. Epic likely doesn't need the money for licensing those games on Apple platforms, but Apple needs headline-grabbing games to make the case that they care about gaming. Cutting off one of the key players in that toolchain is not the way to keep those sorts of games coming to your platform.

So you are arguing them to be treated differently? What people, including big companies, are claiming Apple is not doing? If I violate the App Store rules, I am removed from the store and can have this same thing happen to me. The fact that Epic is big, with all those games you mention, you want different developers to be treated differently? I am only one developer. I won't have the resources to create 10+ popular titles with a game engine like Epic does. However, I think its fair that Joe Somebody and Epic Games are treated the same.

 

[Ethosik]

Like it or not, Apple isn’t wrong in this case. Epic signed the agreement knowing what the criteria was... they signed the contract to be offered and sold on Apples platform. That was their choice.

this is a bs case that is about to cause Epic to lose - a lot...

How can people argue and disagree with this (your downvotes and people saying Apple is wrong here)? There are rules and guidelines. If you don't follow them, this is what happens. Its as easy as that.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Something similar happened with flash. You might say that flash was only good because it was popular. Without iOS it died. If Apple and Google blocks apps made with Unreal than developers might just avoid Unreal to ensure their game is eligible.

And, for those that are cross platform and have a deep development pipeline integrated with Unreal, they’d either go to their own internal engine which they control (I’m sure some are having this conversation now, just like Apple was having the conversation to go with their own chips instead of Intel) or switch to another engine that they can depend on to not antagonize Apple or Google.

Somewhere in these companies are the guys that fought hard for their developers to use the Unreal Engine and they are sweating now because that decision may cost their company MILLIONS!

 

[MacCheetah3]

I'm pretty sure Epic could find a way to download the latest version of Xcode to maintain their Unreal engine...

Indeed. Xcode is a public, free download, API documentation is via public URLs, the Apple Developer app and videos are public, free to access. So, Epic should be able to continue to update the UE (code) for iOS, they just wouldn't be able to publish apps/games or otherwise access the Connect portal.

 

[TiggrToo]

How can people argue and disagree with this (your downvotes and people saying Apple is wrong here)? There are rules and guidelines. If you don't follow them, this is what happens. Its as easy as that.

A little bit of ignorance, and an inherent disgust for Apple, goes a long long way...

 

[CarlJ]

Going to be fewer games on iOS if unreal engine goes away.

I’m wondering if Epic has license deals with some of the bigger users of the unreal engine that require Epic to maintain the tools in a “usable state”, which could bring more pain upon Epic if they let their developer account lapse.

 

[Cosmosent]

Is this NOT the coolest thing to (ever) happen to the iOS App Store ?

Two major players going at it !

The Outcome could go either way, that, IMO, makes it very cool !

I generally Side with Apple on this one.

My main gripe against Apple & their curated iOS App Store is something else entirely, their "Complete & Total Stranglehold on App Discovery".

And, it affects far more Apps & App Devs than Pricing !

 

[4jasontv]

Indeed. Xcode is a public, free download, API documentation is via public URLs, the Apple Developer app and videos are public, free to access. So, Epic should be able to continue to update the UE (code) for iOS, they just wouldn't be able to publish apps/games or otherwise access the Connect portal.

Updates that fix unreal future iOS issue might suggest unreal has unauthorized access to development tools.

 

[Naaaaak]

They should have picked different tooling.

Apple promoted Unreal optimizations for Metal / VR / more at their developer conferences. Unreal isn't an obscure indie hacker project; it's helped generate $Billions in revenue for companies.

What tooling would a MacRumors full-time poster like yourself suggest?

“Signing on” to the lawsuit doesn’t change the results of the lawsuit, and just puts targets on their back. They have no skin in the game - why would they do that?

If you use Unreal and it won't be supported in 2 weeks because Epic can't support it on Apple devices, your bottom line is directly impacted and you've already been targetted. You have skin in the game. Apple about to skin you alive just for using Unreal.