Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple is a business!!! No one forced Epic Games to sign a LEGAL DOCUMENT with Apple to have their content made available through APPLE’s App Store! I get it, it sucks to not get the potential money your game is bringing in, but you went about it by breaking your agreement and violating its terms! Apple has every right to do what they’re doing just as you have every right to boycott or take your content off the App Store. We all know you won’t because it’s getting you a **** load of money and you’re all money hoarding swines. Apple has spent a decade optimizing its iOS and App Store. They’re not just doing nothing and taking a cut 😂 Their platform alone is one of the sole reason people are playing your game. Most people worldwide can’t afford a gaming console. People are truly ridiculous and greedy.
 
So, all Microsoft had to do back in the 90s was say you weren't just buying Windows, but into the Microsoft ecosystem and they would have been able to get by with bundling Office into Windows? If I didn't know any better, I'd say we were playing a game of semantics.

It isn't really semantics. Microsoft, at the time, didn't manufacture Windows devices - and even now their market share is minimal. Show me a Dell iPhone, else you're comparing Apples and oranges...

A - OS with a dominant market share across a wide range of devices made by other manufacturers, the "industry standard"
B - OS only available on a range of devices from the same manufacturer, not even close to a dominant market share in that sector (by volume)
 
  • Like
Reactions: SuperCachetes


Epic Games, the company behind Fortnite that recently entered into a major dispute with Apple over App Store policies, is aiming to organize a wider opposition to Apple, reports The Information.

Very interesting. I wonder how many of the others who eventually sign up to this coordinated group will prove to have significant Chinese ownership, as EPIC does (TenCent owns a sizeable slice of EPIC). Also interesting that Spotify is 9.1% owned by TenCent. Is there a pattern here, one wonders?
.
As a consumer, I applaud the lengths that Apple has put in place to protect users and am quite prepared to pay a premium for it - as indeed I do for all the Apple gear I buy. I am very unimpressed that EPIC would like to claim that they are doing me some sort of service by trying to break Apple's App Store - let's be clear, I dont want to play some game and then find that the game software then also hacked my Netflix and Spotify accounts, for example. Or that my user data is being harvested, or that my kids are being sent targeted ads etc. This from Wikipedia - is it just a rumour?: "In late March 2020, accusations began circulating on social media that Houseparty led to other services such as Netflix and Spotify being hacked. However, its owners, Epic Games, claimed this was a smear campaign against its product and offered a $1 million bounty for anyone able to substantiate their claim"

EPIC, what is stopping you offering your paid component via web browser, rather than from within your Apps, and leave the App Store the hell alone?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DEXTERITY
Payment processing is not free. Epic is not arguing that Apple should charge 0%. It is arguing that Apple should charge a more realistic fee than a flat 30% on all IAP when their costs are much lower than that.

Paying $7.99 vs $9.99 for the same product is absolutely better for customers.
Paying the smaller amount is good for the customer ONLY if this can be done without the customer being deprived of the protection currently afforded by the App Store - that is worth a damn site more than a couple of dollars on some trivial game. And guys, it is absolutely NOT the right of EPIC to say what profit margin others should have. Also, if EPIC are being entirely straightforward, why are they not complaining about STEAM's fee structure also?
 
You can only buy Fortnite skins inside the game from Epic. Should Epic win this battle with Apple they’ll open up their own platform for other people to setup stores inside Fortnite with no Epic fees right?

You mean like this?


This store doesn't have the reach that AppStore has or they would have never developed for it.
 
Paying the smaller amount is good for the customer ONLY if this can be done without the customer being deprived of the protection currently afforded by the App Store - that is worth a damn site more than a couple of dollars on some trivial game. And guys, it is absolutely NOT the right of EPIC to say what profit margin others should have. Also, if EPIC are being entirely straightforward, why are they not complaining about STEAM's fee structure also?

EPIC earlier last year wanted to boycott steam and went on a campaign against it. It didn't work out so well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arbuthnott
In 2019 Apple collected $50 billion from the App Store; paying out devs about $35 billion. So Apple made $15 billion

Fortnite in 2019 made 1.8 billion; not the company profits but the one game. Epic made 12% of profits Apple makes on ALL apps, the whole app store, in a year on one game.

It's hard to feel bad for Epic here making almost $2 billion by preying on kids buying overpriced IAPs that they code once. Meanwhile Apple has to maintain Xcode & dev tools, host the apps, moderate the app store, review apps, etc etc. That $15 billion isnt "profit cash in pocket"
Hosting executable files in an organised fashion with an interface and running virus scanner to ensure they are safe while rest of the world working hard to develop unique creations after licensing the tool from Apple had to part away many many billions every quarter to just the Static App Store not bad business model for Apple. Rent seeking monopoly market place it is. It hurts all parties except Apple but that doesn’t mean EPIC or someone is correct in their fight with Apple, definitely their agenda is skirt through atrocious 30% cut!
 
A better fee would be one in line with the costs of payment processing for IAP, which are c5-10%. I would define "crazy high" as multiples of that, say 3x to 6x.

My negotiation tactic would be to bring public attention to the fact that Apple takes an unnecessary 20% from every IAP. I would do this by providing an alternative option that only charges 10%. Every one of my millions of users, and every media outlet, will then see exactly what the issue is and I will have significant public support for my pro-consumer stance.

Obviously I know this is in breach of the current App Store terms, and Apple will take down my hugely popular app for doing this. That's exactly what I want them to do, because that gives me the cause to file a lawsuit saying the current terms of the App Store are unenforceable since they prevent competition and allow Apple to dictate pricing for IAP payments as they see fit. It also solidifies public perceptions in my favour when Apple are undertaking what will be perceived to be further anti-consumer actions to protect their original anti-consumer stance.

I think I'd want to be more open and tie the update to a new season along side the new feature and let Apple still block it without hiding the code behind a remote activation toggle to get it passed through App Store review. All they've done by doing this is give Apple more legal angles to push a clear bad faith argument. After submitting the update that you'd expect Apple to refuse, I'd wait a week (or two) to then file suit if Apple refuse to back down stating you made a good faith attempt to negotiate bringing the new season out. I'd play out with Apple that was visible refusing and holding back the new season from players. At that point, maybe a week later, I'd release the 1984 ad parody because then instead of looking like you'd planned it and had it all ready to go it's a gradual roll out so you keep riding the media circus instead of blowing their load on a single day against both Apple and Google. You've taken three weeks of media hype train along the way.

To be honest they need something that they can point to as being harmful to themselves, they went for an option that clearly violated their terms instead of taking a path where the app is rejected, crowing about it and then having a little more control of the media. Apple went to remove access from a clearly hostile and antagonistic party for which they're attempting to get an injunction against though as their only loss is mostly monetary I don't expect it to succeed. Interesting legal times!
 
It just struck me that if Epic makes most its money off of consoles vs mobile, they are could be coming out with some mobile first games they plan on making a lot from; in which case this is their chance ensure they will maximize their profits before its released.
I think Epic, more than anything else, sees mobile devices as getting more and more powerful, powerful enough to run AAA games and there’s not currently an angle where they can have unimpeded access to some of these devices.
Or you can justify the cost.
Epic taking on Apple in this manner is a loss for everyone. Litigation could go on for years.
Epic CEO make nice to Apple before they close your account.
It won’t be years as it’s pretty much open and shut. Epic will produce a proper version, Apple will review and post it and Epic will have gotten the PR they were looking for.
 
I think Epic, more than anything else, sees mobile devices as getting more and more powerful, powerful enough to run AAA games and there’s not currently an angle where they can have unimpeded access to some of these devices.


It won’t be years as it’s pretty much open and shut. Epic will produce a proper version, Apple will review and post it and Epic will have gotten the PR they were looking for.

Assuming Epic learns their place.
 
Ah yes, bow down to Tim Cook
iPhone wouldn't be where it is today without its ecosystem of apps, who should learn their place?

Epic. I just said that. Apps are necessary evil. But no developer is bigger than the platform itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jinnj
This is such a stupid hill to die on. Do like Kindle and only let people buy in a browser so you don't have to give Apple a cut or do some third degree price discrimination. Charge one price on iOS devices and charge a cheaper price on your website for people who are willing to take the extra step to save a couple of bucks.
Against terms to charge different prices. But they can take a page from Netflix and only offer payments via their website. We the kids look into it they see that only via Epic can they get vbucks.
 
So the parents who buy their sons and daughters a phone, won't want to buy Apple anymore since it doesn't come with their favourite games (not just Fortnite). Therefore, the backlash is a lower number of sales. I'm not talking about verbal backlash which there obviously already is currently.
That's happened already. The mobile market for Fortnite is pennies compared to PC and Consoles. That is the only reason Epic did this. That and new iOS subscribers were trending down.
 
everybody does, some charge even more, but apparently only Apple is evil here
Fees... Disc Pressing fees, release fees, update fees. Oh and the dev kits!!! got $10 grand? get in line and wait until I call you. I know your game has blood in it but it ain't launching until you remove it. Midway had to deal with Nintendo on that one. And they think Apple is picky.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.