My hope is that they tell Tim S. to go pound sand. He's like the Elon Musk of ruining stable and safe platforms.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Epic Games Submits Fortnite to U.S. App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Is Fortnite even that relevant in the gaming industry anymore? The only time I hear about it is on this site.
It's a known quantity. It's not well-regarded (you could say looked down upon) in the desktop gaming space, Steam forums make that abundantly clear. It's skibidy toilet in game form.
Apple would be distributing the Epic app for the same amount they charge McDonald's, Walmart, Target, Starbucks, Uber, Bank of America, etc. to distribute their apps.
Not so long ago, MacBooks had the battery under the system, and a set of snap clips to plop the battery out, and put in a different one. Yes, some of the old batteries would swell a bit, but so very easy to change out. My kid is using the 2007 MacBook Pro that I had when he was born.
Apple was better for the consumer back then.
Why should Apple be the arbiter of the games people play on their devices?
But Apple's okay with gambling apps (like Fliff) that get kids to empty their wallets.
If you're not familiar with Fliff...
‘Social sportsbook’ apps are luring young fans — and raising alarms
Fliff and similar apps can essentially groom underage people, advocates warn, training them to gamble at ages when they are more susceptible to addiction.
www.washingtonpost.com
In the days leading up to kickoff, users of Fliff, a popular mobile gaming app, placed more than 200,000 “bets” on last month’s NFL conference championship games. They bet on Patrick Mahomes throwing for at least 240 yards, on Christian McCaffrey scoring the first touchdown and on the usual array of money line, point spread and over-under offerings.
They did it, in many cases, without verifying their age or even spending a dollar.
That’s because Fliff is not a traditional online sportsbook. It’s a “social sportsbook,” and a pillar of its business model involves users making bets with “virtual currency.” That has enabled Fliff and apps like it to operate with little interference from state or federal authorities that regulate sports betting despite being marketed in some places as “suitable for ages 13 and up” and easily downloaded by even younger users.
The apps, advocates warn, can essentially groom underage people, training them to gamble at ages when they are more susceptible to addiction. And though the apps are mostly played using virtual money, Fliff and some like it allow users to make in-app purchases with a credit card and wager actual money. Fliff claims it functions as a legal sweepstakes contest, not a sports-betting enterprise, a distinction that troubles many stakeholders in the industry.
“The people who have gambling problems, who are vulnerable to gambling problems and especially youth, can develop gambling problems based on usage of these apps,” said Keith Whyte, executive director of the National Council on Problem Gambling.
There will be an option to use Epic Games payment processing or IAP from apple
Attachments
Well the last part is fine, kids demand all sorts of things from their parents.
This is exactly the point that Apple failed to clearly demonstrated during the trial.
I believe that the resurfaced old emails where Apple executives decided the infamous 30% cut out of nowhere, instead of providing a more thoughtful and reasoned explanation, were detrimental.
I do believe that Apple is entitled to a fee for the IP behind the SDK's that powers all the apps available in the platform and a fee for the app and content distribution.
If instead of defending the 30% cut, Apple had explaining the costs associated with the SDK, servers, security, and other expenses, it might have achieved a better result.
$99/year is ridiculous for some big companies and 30% of everything is too much as well.
It's like any old video game, eventually it loses relevancy. I believe the overall player base is higher than in the past but it's not on the mind of the general public like some years ago.
It’s funny that you think $99 annually covers server costs for millions of downloads. It’s unfortunate so many people have opinions based on incorrect information
Apple stick to your Guns, do not let Epic back in the App Store. #boycottepicgames #boycottfortnite #canceltimsweeny
As of the past hour there are 1.3m players online right now. Not Minecraft numbers but definitely most than some online games.
I don't play Fortnite but have been interested in some of the virtual concerts and events they've done in the past.
It's $99 if you have a twenty million downloads or $99 if you have one download. I'm not too concerned about Apple's costs here, as they are clearly aren't anywhere near losing money.
I'm sure Apple will find some reason to reject it. I gave up submitting my Pagan Journaling and Social Media app for witches, pagans, and wiccans. I submitted it literally over 10 different times and got rejections ranging from someone not liking the font and calling it a Spam app saying they had tarot card apps already.(they clearly do not test the apps or look at them as my app is not a Tarot Card app....) I moved all of my payment system to Stripe this week and I'm going to use AltStore in the US and Europe. Screw Apple and their gatekeeping BS. And if you look at some of my past statements, I used to be completely for their side until I realized what they were actually doing.
I haven't been following the story but didn't Apple lose the legal battle? The game is available on literally everything except iOS. Let the kids and adults who play enjoy and drop the gate keeping.
No, actually Epic lost everything except one point. The judge ruled that Apple didn't have a monopoly, didn't have to allow alternate app stores, was within its rights to kick Epic off, didn't have to reinstate their account and, because Epic broke the legally-binding agreement they agreed to, Epic had to pay Apple the 30% of IAP purchases that bypassed the App Store for the like 24 hours Epic Store purchases were live in the app.
The judge did say Apple had to allow apps the ability to link out to the web, and say prices were cheaper there. She based that ruling off her interpretation of a California law, which California courts have since clarified Apple was not in violation of, which is one of the things Apple is appealing about the judge's recent order you may have heard about.
Again, why are you OK with companies getting in the way of doing what you want to do with your device? Where are the consumers interests in these arguments?
I, as a consumer, don't get the choice to boycott Fortnite on my phone, as Apple has already made that choice for me.
I've never played Fortnite, nor anything else by epic.
microsoft does so much free, github, sdks, copilot(free tier), conferences, workshops, events, all free because they know developers drive windows
apple has their own strategy which is fine but $99 is not ridiculous. at least for the tools part
Not who you are responding to, but I think Apple should be able to kick a known bad actor who intentionally violated a developer agreement they signed off the store.
Would you feel the same way about letting Epic back on if Epic had been violating developer agreement by secretly pushing malware?