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

[Manzanito]

That has nothing to do with what I asked.

I think it does. You asked if I prefer Nintendo, but I don’t have to choose between nintendo or apple just because you asked who’s nicer to developers. Lucky for all of us, there are tons of places to choose from, hence my answer.

I’m not familiar with Nintendo’s practices, but if they are like you described, I choose neither. Plenty of other houses.

 

[4jasontv]

I think it does. You asked if I prefer Nintendo, but I don’t have to choose between nintendo or apple just because you asked who’s nicer to developers. Lucky for all of us, there are tons of places to choose from, hence my answer.

I’m not familiar with Nintendo’s practices, but if they are like you described, I choose neither. Plenty of other houses.

I asked if you prefer Nintendo's way of limiting how many games a publisher can release per year. Not just if you want Nintendo...

 

[Chazz08]

I asked if you prefer Nintendo's way of limiting how many games a publisher can release per year. Not just if you want Nintendo...

And he responded to you what he preferred....In case you didn't read the whole comment like many internet users nowadays, "I’m not familiar with Nintendo’s practices, but if they are like you described, I choose neither. Plenty of other houses."

 

[Chazz08]

Yet Microsoft didn't start acting like complete ****s like Epic did, even though they (Microsoft) had a more valid reason to do so. Says more about Epic than anyone else. I'm sure MS is working on a solution with Apple without acting like adolescent kids to get their way.

That's because it's run by real businessmen and not gamer wannabes. No offense, although I'm sure they will be, it's true. Epic is acting like an entitled brat. GTFO Epic.

 

[Manzanito]

I asked if you prefer Nintendo's way of limiting how many games a publisher can release per year. Not just if you want Nintendo...

As I said, I prefer neither, and there are lots of places to publish games.

I neither like nor dislike Nintendo’s games. I don’t think I’ve used a nintendo product since the original nes, so no, I was not referring to gaming preference. I was just pointing out that even if nintendo does thing wrong, that doesn’t makes apple right. And that there are lots of places for developers to publish their games.

 

[LeadingHeat]

Violating the guidelines isn't the problem. If you do that, your app gets rejected, you fix the problem and submit it again. No big deal.

The problem is that they submitted an application which intentionally changed its behaviour after a few months. So it was reviewed, the app behaviour at review time met the guidelines, and a few months later it changed to behaviour that was blatantly in violation of the guidelines. Kind of fraudulent.

I think we’re arguing about the same thing. Having it change itself later on still is breaking the guidelines and rules of operating an app in the App Store. But yeah either way they did a no-no

 

[4jasontv]

As I said, I prefer neither, and there are lots of places to publish games.

I neither like nor dislike Nintendo’s games. I don’t think I’ve used a nintendo product since the original nes, so no, I was not referring to gaming preference. I was just pointing out that even if nintendo does thing wrong, that doesn’t makes apple right. And that there are lots of places for developers to publish their games.

But they will all do something you don't like. They have to have a barrier for entry or their platform will be filled with trash. Charging fees helps keep riff-raff out. Limiting sales also works. Developers don't have any sort of intrinsic right to publish on any store they want. It's a dance. The platform has to be attractive enough to get the developers attention and the developer needs to learn the moves based on the song playing. If they stay in sync than the rest of us get to watch something beautiful. Otherwise it's just a chaotic rave with a cover charge and overpriced drinks served by indifferent bartenders.

 

[4jasontv]

They didn't answer my question which was pick one of the options offered. They dismissed the question by trying to find a way around it and I called them out for it. It doesn't matter if it's a legitimate response. It wasn't the question. In gaming your choices will be limited. Would you rather it be limited by charging larger fees or by restricting releases. Those are the proposed options.

 

[Seanz]

“guidelines that protect our consumers (and profits)”

Can one company just have the balls to say it? Just one, please? Can we get some reality back into this world, and drop PR-speak forever? Can it happen? Just say you’re selfish. Just say it! We know it, we know Epic is too, but can your ass just come out and be real and SAY IT?

I think for-profit is generally the ideal for most businesses.. but maybe I'm wrong.

 

[Seanz]

What's the difference between a physical and digital piece of clothing? If you are spending your life in a virtual space doesn't that make it real? People put time and effort into creating physical and digital clothing. Who is to say what is more valuable or what is considered 'real'. I think that Apple is being extremely anti competitive here.

Look at it from a protection framework. Apple seeks to protect you from harmful media and does actually prohibit the sale of dangerous or illegal real-world items. The service they provide is the secured App store and iDevice ecosystem, if you don't want that, don't buy into it; vote with your money and see. Real-world laws keep most harmful sales in check, so Apple wouldn't (and probably couldn't) scour something like Amazon for dangerous products and thus doesn't 'tax' them for it. If Amazon used "Lumberyard" to start selling apps and offering a direct version of V-bucks the way Epic has, Apple would remove them from the app store just the same.

 

[Seend1983]

Since we've all agreed that Epic Games has absolutely no chance in winning this because they have absolutely no legal grounds, let's talk about what Apple should do. Apple has the right to push a payment arrangement that it sees fit, it is a BUSINESS after all, however, I believe it would be more beneficial if Apple change their fee system. Namely, it shouldn't be a flat out 30% charge, but more of a progressive charge like the tax system. In our tax system we don't expect everyone to pay 30% tax. There's different tiers for different income levels - higher income pays more, lower income pays less. Should be like that for the App Store - multibillion dollar companies like Epic should be "taxed" at the highest tier, while the smaller developers would expect to pay much less. At a certain size, like a beginner dev with their first app, it would be free or close to it. As developers begin making more money and climbs the revenue ladder, Apple could increase the cut up until a maximum limit. Apps making tens of millions of dollars a month could rightfully expect to the pay the highest amount, since they're benefiting from the App Store the most. I'm sure some will still whine and complain though, but that just takes us back to where we are today with Epic Games vs Apple.

 

[mrcloaked]

I'm a bit unsure.

 

[SkyRom]

Just one more reason to never game on a Mac.

 

[Alan Wynn]

What I think would be the best solution is for Apple (and Google of course), to lower that 30% cut.

Why? Just because you think it is more “fair”? On Android, there are competitive stores. Epic tried that route and had to give up because no one felt it was worth it to do so. Seems like the market says it is worth it.

I don't support violating App Store rules obviously. If Apple took a smaller cut than the 30% that, by the way, made total sense in 2009, maybe we wouldn't be here today.

Again, why? The App Store has become more valuable, not less so. This has nothing to do with what it costs Apple it is about the value to the developer. If they do not think it is worth it, they have a choice. Develop for some other platform. It is neither Apple’s nor Google’s nor MicroSoft’s nor Nintendo’s nor Sony’s problem if a developer cannot be profitable on their platform. If they cannot be profitable, they should find a different platform or product. People essentially keep saying: “But I want to develop iOS apps but should not have to pay Apple what they want to do so.” Sorry, I want a Boom Aviation plane, but I cannot afford it. I either need to accept that I cannot have one, or find a different way of paying for it. I cannot just decide that they should sell it to me at the price I am willing to pay and then expect them to do so (or worse, just steal it, leaving behind what I think they deserve).

The question is : what would be a reasonable cut, today in 2020 ? I don't have an answer to that, maybe around 20-ish, OR put a limit of money that Apple can generate from a single app.

Reasonable in what way? If Apple gets capped, should the developers be capped? Things would be cheaper if no programmer made more than $30,000 (that even covers a $15 minimum wage for 2,000 hours a year). Should we cap those salaries?

Your argument is irrational.

 

[Manzanito]

But they will all do something you don't like. They have to have a barrier for entry or their platform will be filled with trash. Charging fees helps keep riff-raff out. Limiting sales also works. Developers don't have any sort of intrinsic right to publish on any store they want. It's a dance. The platform has to be attractive enough to get the developers attention and the developer needs to learn the moves based on the song playing. If they stay in sync than the rest of us get to watch something beautiful. Otherwise it's just a chaotic rave with a cover charge and overpriced drinks served by indifferent bartenders.

All I know is developers were happy before with apple, and lots of them are not anymore.

I like apple products, and it would be better for customers, developers and apple if we could return to that state. For that to happen, apple is going to have to move, at this point sticking to “my platforms, my rules“ is not going to help anyone, nor apple, nor developers, nor customers. Even if apple has the right to do so.

 

[4jasontv]

All I know is developers were happy before with apple, and lots of them are not anymore.

I like apple products, and it would be better for customers, developers and apple if we could return to that state. For that to happen, apple is going to have to move, at this point sticking to “my platforms, my rules“ is not going to help anyone, nor apple, nor developers, nor customers. Even if apple has the right to do so.

I feel like it’s a few entitled developers making noise. Most seem happy with Apple.

 

[Manzanito]

I feel like it’s a few entitled developers making noise. Most seem happy with Apple.

Time will tell. If it’s like you say, apple won’t budge and nothing will really happen. Otherwise, apple will change some rules.

 

[mrcloaked]

I feel torn.

 

[4jasontv]

Right? We’ve grown to love this company so much... I.. err... I mean, is this really happening? No, I... hmm.. I want to believe my Apple is still loved. They make my favorite products.

Exactly. It's the devices we love, not the abandonware and adver-tracking apps.

 

[Manzanito]

Right? We’ve grown to love this company so much... I.. err... I mean, is this really happening? No, I... hmm.. I want to believe my Apple is still loved. They make my favorite products.

That seems to be the case with a few people, but sometimes if you like a company is better to call them out when they’re wrong. And better yet, vote with your wallet.

I remember people defending to death the butterfly keyboard, like apple could do no wrong.

 

[4jasontv]

That seems to be the case with a few people, but sometimes if you like a company is better to call them out when they’re wrong. And better yet, vote with your wallet.

I remember people defending to death the butterfly keyboard, like apple could do no wrong.

I didn’t make the connection but I can kind of see how fortnight is like the butterfly keyboards.

 

[nickgovier]

.

 

[theotherphil]

"industry standard" is such a ******** cop out.

It means “what consumers are willing to pay”. Seen in every market, literally everywhere. If there was 10 choices and the customer is willing to pay 30%, then the industry standard is 30%. Apple set the 30% as it was the lowest commission at the time and everybody else said “dammit, we’ll have to charge that or we won’t be competitive.”

Apple hasn’t raised it since and tellingly, nobody else has dropped it either....because that’s what consumers are willing to pay.

 

[AppliedVisual]

I feel like it’s a few entitled developers making noise. Most seem happy with Apple.

Your feelings are spot on. As a long-time Apple developer myself, it’s never been better. And I develop for Android and Windows as well. I don’t know of any other developers who are unhappy with the current system. Sure, we’d all love to sell products without Apple taking a cut, but we have to acknowledge that is the price to be able to sell and promote through the App Store portals. We have to acknowledge that the developer keeping 70% is a huge bargain compared to what developers received in the past from most publishers. Apple pushed the 70/30 split and forced Sony and Microsoft to follow suit. Google also adheres to the 30% take. It’s very difficult for small indie developers to make much money in the App Store just because of sheer volume these days. The glory days for the small guy are mostly over. It still can be done if a truly unique game goes viral. But most of the real success these days are larger developers pumping out tons of cookie-cutter stuff or those who can market the bejeezus out of their app.

I skimmed through over 30 pages of this “discussion” and saw little to no mention of what’s coming down from Google and Microsoft on this. Google is at the same stage with Epic that Apple is and has issued a warning that they will suspend Epic’s developer accounts in the coming weeks. I think they’re allowing until Sept. 15th. Microsoft issued Epic a warning telling them to not even try this. Epic tried this with Steam and lost.

As a smaller developer, mostly corporate and custom app development, I have to say this is refreshing to see Apple taking this stand. It’s nice to see that they want everyone to play by the same rules, no matter how big or small. Not like Sony where Epic gets a free pass on the platform because Sony is so involved and invested with Epic and Unreal Engine development. And Unreal is the only way to really develop for the PS5 at this point, for those who have jumped in.

 

[topdrawer]

It means “what consumers are willing to pay”. Seen in every market, literally everywhere. If there was 10 choices and the customer is willing to pay 30%, then the industry standard is 30%. Apple set the 30% as it was the lowest commission at the time and everybody else said “dammit, we’ll have to charge that or we won’t be competitive.”

Apple hasn’t raised it since and tellingly, nobody else has dropped it either....because that’s what consumers are willing to pay.

it also means we feel powerless to do anything about it.