Epic Games Setting Up Webshops for iOS Developers to Offer Users Out-of-App Purchases

[I7guy]

It is a gatekeeper because only in magical fantasy land is Apple going to disappear tomorrow...

They are important in the real world. If they disappeared we would adapt but that doesn't mean they have no dominant power in the world today, or that, today, in the real world where people actually live and make choices, that devs have a real choice about whether or not to support iOS or not.

There are many “important” corporations. But I guess the bottom line is because the eu says they are a gatekeeper, they are. The eu has introduced new vernacular into the world.

And who is to say what dominant is? Imo no. Influential and popular - absolutely. Apple took the risk of the App Store not the devs. Devs only have to come with their “A” game.

 

[0049190]

But the third party app stores exist and are selling apps right now in the EU.

I don’t live in the EU so I don’t have access to those app stores. Regardless, it will take time for users to learn about them and attract customers. Most users don’t read websites like this so they probably don’t even know third party app stores are available. That will change over time as they get more media coverage.

 

[Rogifan]

Yes. You'll be (presumably) using Apple's IP to use the digital product on your device. You won't be using Apple's IP when you use the hand lotion.

OK but I buy all my Kindle books from amazon.com where Apple gets nothing. Do you think there should be a fee on things that are cross-platform? Or that I could read on a stand alone device?

 

[bcortens]

I can’t tell if people are purposefully misstating the issue at hand or if they are struggling to come up with a proper analogy. I apologize for reposting, but here’s my response to a previous comment:

What if Walmart funded the infrastructure and ongoing maintenance of the factory that produces Heinz ketchup in return for exclusive supply to Walmart? This is a frequently overlooked aspect. For example, consider Target approaching Heinz to stock their products while assuming they will continue using the factories supported by Walmart.

In this tortured analogy, it might seem unfair for Walmart to prevent Heinz from selling their product elsewhere. However, it also seems reasonable for Heinz to pay a fair market value for the infrastructure provided by Walmart. Wouldn’t you agree?

I'll try and use your analogy. Suppose that Heinz (standing in for the mass of all 3rd party devs) is the only reason 50% of shoppers bother to shop at Walmart (the value Apps add to the App Store), in that case Walmart has a very good incentive to build that factory for Heinz even if Heinz never pays a penny to Walmart.

This is what you and others keep missing. You want it to be all about how magnanimous Apple is for building the tools, and how it is so obviously the developers who are beholden to Apple and owe Apple for these magical tools when in fact making sure your platform has a critical mass of third party devs is part of what keeps the platform itself viable. Ask Microsoft, or Blackberry how well building a platform goes when you don't have that critical mass of third party developer support.

 

[jumpcutking]

Epic Games today announced plans for Epic Games Store Webshops, a feature that will allow developers to launch digital storefronts that are hosted by the Epic Games Store. With Apple's mandated App Store rule changes in the United States, developers will soon be able to direct customers to web shops to make out-of-app purchases, bypassing the in-app purchase flow.

The Epic Games Store will charge developers a 0 percent fee for the first $1,000,000 in revenue they collect per app per year, and after that, developers will need to pay Epic a 12 percent cut. The fees are applicable to all payments that are processed by the Epic Games Store. Epic Games also says that players that spend in Epic Webshops will be able to accrue 5 percent Epic Rewards on all purchases.

Many smaller games do not exceed $1 million in revenue per year, so the Epic Games Store Webshop could be a viable option for small and independent developers. Developers that earn more will likely want to set up their own payment options using online payment platforms like Stripe or Shopify for even lower fees.

Epic's announcement follows a ruling yesterday that will see Apple forced to make major updates to its U.S. App Store policies as part of an ongoing App Store dispute with Epic Games. Apple cannot prevent developers from directing customers to better deals outside of the App Store, nor can the company collect fees for these purchases, among other changes.

Apple was ordered to comply with the order immediately, and the court said that it "will not tolerate further delays." Apple said that it plans to implement the changes as ordered, though it will appeal the decision.

Article Link: Epic Games Setting Up Webshops for iOS Developers to Offer Users Out-of-App Purchases

Doesn’t anyone else see this as self-serving? They got Apple to remove their 12-30% in app purchase charge and now Epic is charging developers 12% for in app purchases?

What is the world coming to? I understand that everyone wants a piece of the pie but you’ve got to see how self serving that is.

Note to self, my company will be working on a solution… that’s cheaper and better. 😂

 

[WiseAJ]

Any app that tries to get me to pay them with Epic Malware is getting deleted.

 

[dandy1117]

I'll try and use your analogy. Suppose that Heinz (standing in for the mass of all 3rd party devs) is the only reason 50% of shoppers bother to shop at Walmart (the value Apps add to the App Store), in that case Walmart has a very good incentive to build that factory for Heinz even if Heinz never pays a penny to Walmart.

This is what you and others keep missing. You want it to be all about how magnanimous Apple is for building the tools, and how it is so obviously the developers who are beholden to Apple and owe Apple for these magical tools when in fact making sure your platform has a critical mass of third party devs is part of what keeps the platform itself viable. Ask Microsoft, or Blackberry how well building a platform goes when you don't have that critical mass of third party developer support.

I believe we all agree, including Apple, on the following points. Currently, app developers who sell their products on the App Store receive 70-85% of the revenue, which is based on revenue sharing rather than profit sharing. We can all acknowledge that the success of the App Store is largely due to the surge of quality third-party apps and the efforts of developers.
I am not claiming that Apple is entirely benevolent; however, I do argue that the exchange is quite advantageous, significantly contributing to the platform's overall success.

 

[iOS Geek]

Nope, no thanks. Won’t be spending my money outside the App Store.

I know in the grand scheme of things, my one single purchase is a drop in the ocean that doesn’t mean much. But at the same time, a 70/30 split with Apple is still more money for you as a developer than a completely lost sale is. 🤷‍♂️

 

[turbineseaplane]

Nope, no thanks. Won’t be spending my money outside the App Store.

I know in the grand scheme of things, my one single purchase is a drop in the ocean that doesn’t mean much. But at the same time, a 70/30 split with Apple is still more money for you as a developer than a completely lost sale is. 🤷‍♂️

That's your prerogative!
All good.

It's great to have choices 🙏

 

[iOS Geek]

That's your prerogative!
All good.

It's great to have choices 🙏

Except that those choices are resulting in a poorer user experience 🤷‍♂️ So no…not much “great” to be seen here. I left Android because of the fragmentation. I now no longer have a choice for an ecosystem that doesn’t have that problem. There is no longer a choice/option for those of us who want a closed ecosystem. But since it’s not the type of “choice” you’re in favor of, I’m sure you’ll ignore that aspect.

It sure would’ve been great to still have a “choice” for a completely closed ecosystem. All we have now is fragmented Android and now fragmented Apple. No choice for those of us who don’t want fragmentation. I also know any debate with you and anyone in favor of this fragmented mess will lead nowhere because you can’t acknowledge a loss of choice for a closed ecosystem (because one now no longer exists), so moving on.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Except that those choices are resulting in a poorer user experience 🤷‍♂️ So no…not much “great” to be seen here. I left Android because of the fragmentation. I now no longer have a choice for an ecosystem that doesn’t have that problem. There is no longer a choice/option for those of us who want a closed ecosystem. But since it’s not the type of “choice” you’re in favor of, I’m sure you’ll ignore that aspect.

It sure would’ve been great to still have a “choice” for a completely closed ecosystem. All we have now is fragmented Android and now fragmented Apple. No choice for those of us who don’t want fragmentation.

I'm sorry you're not going to get what you want.
🙏

 

[spazzcat]

Except that those choices are resulting in a poorer user experience 🤷‍♂️ So no…not much “great” to be seen here. I left Android because of the fragmentation. I now no longer have a choice for an ecosystem that doesn’t have that problem. There is no longer a choice/option for those of us who want a closed ecosystem. But since it’s not the type of “choice” you’re in favor of, I’m sure you’ll ignore that aspect.

It sure would’ve been great to still have a “choice” for a completely closed ecosystem. All we have now is fragmented Android and now fragmented Apple. No choice for those of us who don’t want fragmentation. I also know any debate with you and anyone in favor of this fragmented mess will lead nowhere because you can’t acknowledge a loss of choice for a closed ecosystem (because one now no longer exists), so moving on.

The best/worse part of this is that it will in the end hurt developers the most. People don't get why the App Store does so well and why developers make most of their app revenue from the App Store. There are way more Android phones in the world, yet Apple is king at making developers money.

 

[iOS Geek]

The best/worse part of this is that it will in the end hurt developers the most. People don't get why the App Store does so well and why developers make most of their app revenue from the App Store. There are way more Android phones in the world, yet Apple is king at making developers money.

It is interesting that that particular detail is often overlooked by some people. Just based on sheer number of Android devices in use compared to Apple devices…you would think Apple’s revenue would be dwarfed by revenue on Android devices.

 

[damienDevZ]

Does this mean we can expect to see other platform like PlayStation having to allow developers to accept payments outside of their store?

I imagine this will lead to stores building services that will allow payments very easily. People seem to think it’ll be an inconvenience, but let’s say Stripe makes something that developers can easily implement as an alternative payment system. Now many or most devs will implement this, and payments will be almost identical in ease as in-app Apple payments.

As long as it adds the app or game to my Apple App Store library and keeps access to things like Game Center Achievements and other Apple API’s I can’t see any downside for devs. Big downside for Apple though.

If this can be implemented into other platforms, then maybe we can all save 30% on games and such. Granted, then PlayStation and Xbox don’t have much incentive to had a platform…

 

[ProbablyDylan]

Big downside for Apple though.

Only if they can't build a competitive payment solution! Though I suppose having to put effort in to build a better service can be seen as a negative, from certain perspectives.

 

[koelsh]

I can’t tell if people are purposefully misstating the issue at hand or if they are struggling to come up with a proper analogy. I apologize for reposting, but here’s my response to a previous comment:

What if Walmart funded the infrastructure and ongoing maintenance of the factory that produces Heinz ketchup in return for exclusive supply to Walmart? This is a frequently overlooked aspect. For example, consider Target approaching Heinz to stock their products while assuming they will continue using the factories supported by Walmart.

In this tortured analogy, it might seem unfair for Walmart to prevent Heinz from selling their product elsewhere. However, it also seems reasonable for Heinz to pay a fair market value for the infrastructure provided by Walmart. Wouldn’t you agree?

Indeed I'm struggling to come up with a proper analogy. I just don't think that's quite what's happening.

The way you're presenting it implies the factory, the physical equipment producing the ketchup, is owned by Walmart and Heinz is renting time on that equipment. And/or that Heinz would be a subsidiary of Walmart.

Rather, Heinz is producing the ketchup themselves to standards agreed upon by themselves, Walmart, and the rest of the industry.

This is one place where analogizing software and physical goods breaks down so I may be off base with this too.

 

[surferfb]

OK but I buy all my Kindle books from amazon.com where Apple gets nothing. Do you think there should be a fee on things that are cross-platform? Or that I could read on a stand alone device?

Again, I am not saying I agree with Apple's decisions around on-device purchases, just that I think they should be the ones who get to set the rules about how their platform operates, because they're the ones who built it. Full disclosure: I read all my books on a Kindle and more than once have been annoyed about having to go to the Kindle store in safari vs. just using the app. So on the one hand, I am glad that will be changing, but I think it should be Apple's choice to make.

A US Supreme Court Justice (Antonin Scalia) once said about being a judge "

If you’re going to be a good and faithful judge, you have to resign yourself to the fact that you’re not always going to like the conclusions you reach. If you like them all the time, you’re probably doing something wrong

That's kinda how I feel here in reverse. I'm happy about the conclusion, but not the way it was come to. I don't particularly like defending Apple on this, and if I were Tim Cook you can bet a lot of App Store policies would be different. But I do feel very strongly it should be Apple's choice to make.

 

[Stuwil]

It's more that Sony owns part of Epic and would move to have Sweeney removed from the board if he tried this, Nintendo will simply expel them from the console, Microsoft would do similar, and then they collapse due to already spending more than they make.

No it’s because Apple sell new iPhones every year so they make a profit every year
Where as the console makers don’t release new computers every year & that’s the difference

 

[djphat2000]

If you want to set up a store to sell food, you could rent a space in a mall.

OR, you could buy a bit of land and build a shop.

Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly keeps you from doing the digital equivalent - which is setting up your own website and letting users download software from there.

If Apple didn't have a monopoly, I would not care AT ALL how much they ripped developers off for. They could charge 95% as far as I care. And I'd be free to NEVER install a single piece of software that used their idiotic app store, I could just install directly from the developer's site without Apple's unneeded and unwanted interference.

But Apple does have a monopoly on iDevice apps. And that needs to be fixed.

All this to me sounds like you don't like how Apple's system works. Which is perfectly fine. You don't have to buy it. Nor does any developer have to develop for it. There are other options in the Android space. Which we can prove simply by saying "what if Apple went away righty now. what would replace it?".

Sony
Samsung
Motorola
Asus
Huawei
Nothing
Google

Some run Android with extra crap on it. Some stock, and some.... Something "else" based on Android.
You, me all of us have a choice.

After all it was many others choice to purchase an iPhone. We as consumers have that choice to either buy it or something else OR nothing at all. Or really nothing at all, not just the phone brand.

 

[Stuwil]

You have several choices, but if you want to use an iPhone you have to use their store.

Right
But you don’t have a choice on iOS & as that’s only on Apple devices then you don’t have much choice so then your choice is then removed hence why your now getting alternative payment options
I believe

 

[Stuwil]

You can only get target branded items at target. Walmart branded items at Walmart. If you want target peanuts you can’t get them at Walmart. But you can get Walmart peanuts at Walmart.

That doesn’t even make sense because we are talking about 3rd party apps not made by Apple
Hence why they should be allowed to offer an alternative payment option

 

[djphat2000]

What could be an alternative solution to monetize the platform? One possibility is to increase the costs and charge all developers, including those of free apps, Tye fair market value for access to the development tools. Another option could be to charge consumers for access to iOS through paid operating system updates or service fees for using features like weather, maps, or Siri server requests.

We used to do this. But now for the consumer this is all free. And the VERY low cost of entry to develop for Apple allows practically anyone the ability to "try". Only paying Apple more when you actually make more.
People don't want to pay for Facebook. Because it started off as free. Even if Mark wanted to charge $.99 a month or a YEAR. People would opt out.

 

[damienDevZ]

Only if they can't build a competitive payment solution! Though I suppose having to put effort in to build a better service can be seen as a negative, from certain perspectives.

Well Apple could build a completive payment solution by simply charging the same as Stripe, which I think is 2.9%. The difference is Stripe doesn’t have to maintain the App Store, build API’s, pay App customer support, etc. So, unless Apple is just willing to eat that cost and make $0 off of any App purchases, they can’t really compete. It seems unfair to Apple. I don’t think even Epic allows that, could be wrong.

Does Epic allow people to purchase games outside of their store for no commission then provide download and support through the Epic launcher?

 

[Stuwil]

What did they say about it? Because that door is open now and their greed will absolutely lead them there. I don’t trust them even if they did promise not to go after them

We can say what we want for or against Apple’s behavior but Epic is just as guilty of trying to squeeze more money out of people

And sure they’ll start at 12% for their own storefront but in two years it’ll probably be 25%

The reason epic are not going after the console makers is very simple
They don’t make new consoles as it’s generally every 6 or more years
Where as Apple make new iPhones every year so they make a fat profit every year compared with the console makers
That’s why

 

[Stuwil]

Yes. It will be cheaper (for now).

But it’s not the point. The point is Epic is basically doing what they said Apple was doing. Not 1 for 1 but close.

It’s kinda hypocritical.

There is a difference my understanding is epic making it cheaper but they are a smaller company
Where as the much larger company is charging a lot more