Epic Games Throwing a 'FreeFortnite Cup' Bash Before iOS Users Lose Access

Vjosullivan said:
Offering in-game purchases through their own payment system at a price lower than via Apple's system is neither bullying nor extortion.

Banning a game for doing that. That is bullying and extortion.
Click to expand...

Here I was thinking it was enforcing the agreed terms of the contract that said that all in app purchases would go through Apple's own IAP. Since there is no coercion I don't see why it's extortion and since the terms apply to App Store developers in general it doesn't seem like bullying unless you say Apple is bullying all of it's developers?
 
Question for anyone thinking Epic is doing the right thing here....

How come Epic's discounted rate is 80% of the iOS price, rather than 70%?

Via iOS, it's $9.99. but direct it's $7.99. If they aren't paying Apple the 'unfair against the consumer' 30% cut, why are Epic charging those same consumers more?

In my book, $9.99 less the 30% 'apple tax' is $6.99. Epic is paying the role of consumer champion, whilst actually taking more money for themselves. Sneaky.
 
Saipher said:
Here is a quote from Epic:
“There's a rationale for [the 30-percent fee] on console where there's enormous investment in hardware, often sold below cost, and marketing campaigns in broad partnership with publishers. But on open platforms, 30 percent is disproportionate to the cost of the services these stores perform, such as payment processing, download bandwidth, and customer service.”
Click to expand...
I'm not sharing the arstechnica link because they are toxic in every way.

However in relation to Epic's statement, Nintendo, Sony and MS all have payment processing, download bandwidth and customer service to deal with. Epic is trying to say their 30% is ok (because they have a stake or deal with Epic) and Apple/Google's same 30% is bad because there's no stake/deal there.
If Epic was saying the 30% overall is bad and all online marketplaces should allow multiple different app stores, then legally Epic would have a better leg to stand on. However because they are saying 30% is not the same as 30% for different online marketplaces, that unequal treatment goes against Epic's claim if equal treatment not occuring. This shows Epic's motives are greed, not equality. It will hurt Epic's case.
 
Moakesy said:
Via iOS, it's $9.99. but direct it's $7.99. If they aren't paying Apple the 'unfair against the consumer' 30% cut, why are Epic charging those same consumers more?
Click to expand...
All of this will add up in court proving it's profit, not equality Epic want.

Though I think Epic know this and are ok to lose the battle vs Apple but win the war via regulation. Having enough different large companies whinging about it to force the regulators hand.
 
Jd3774life said:
Seems like a good way for lazy devs to stop updating the mobile game with a "creative" excuse... :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Or a good time to move to more open platform, where the OS devs don’t spend most of the time reinventing the wheel, or by moving UI elements back and fort, or by building widgets for the [n]time, or by building another gorgeous, amazing, unbelievable, full advance cloud service to trap users in a way that becomes even more difficult for them to move away.
 
Wildkraut said:
Or a good time to move to more open platform, where the OS devs don’t spend most of the time reinventing the wheel, or by moving UI elements back and fort, or by building widgets for the [n]time, or by building another gorgeous, amazing, unbelievable, full advance cloud service to trap users in a way that becomes even more difficult for them to move away.
Click to expand...
If the OS developers didn't keep reinventing the wheel we'd still have this as the OS on phones and Macs in 2020.
a2gsfinder.jpg
 
obamtl said:
If there were true competition, there’d be no problem, but Apple walls us, it’s customers, in, and then extracts a ransom from anyone who wants to sell to us. Let’s have some competition. Let’s have alternative ways to get apps. If I were a betting man, Apple will win this battle but lose the war. The EU will kill their app store model and others will follow suit. But they’re a $2 trillion company (a sign of how much profit they extract from customers) so I’m shedding no tears for them.
Click to expand...
Are you ok with the Playstation store? Miscosoft store? Nintendo eshop? They are just as "walled in" as the iOS store is.
 
Vjosullivan said:
Offering in-game purchases through their own payment system at a price lower than via Apple's system is neither bullying nor extortion.

Banning a game for doing that. That is bullying and extortion.
Click to expand...

From my understanding, developers do have a mutual agreement on the rules that apply in order to use the app stores prior publishing apps there for the first time. This is a cold blooded move to make more money. I can't see any bullying here.

It rather looks like Epic wants to do something about their smallest market share wich is the mobile app market. Either this will make current mobile users switch platforms or those who are using consoles to stay away from the Android/iOS app, spend more time with the game and talk about the whole thing. Epic probably hopes to have people picking sides, gaining attention and press. After all they do look like the victim in this play, don't they?
 
I'd like everyone that think Apple are greedy to do the following:
1. Start an online service where you can join for free…
2. Market your clients to the public for free…
3. Solve the entire payment process, with complaints, credits and other situations for free…
4. Keep the platform steady and running, for free…
5. Employ thousands of people that hold all this together, without paying them salary…

…and not debit the clients anything. Go ahead, just do it! It seems so easy when you say it.

*ALL* markets take their share to make a profit. It's called business. Without it, you call it communism, slavery, or maybe something else.
 
lolrepeatlol said:
Do people NOT realize when they say this, they are ignoring Apple’s whole part? It’s the company that refuses to back down from their monopolistic 30% cut. They’re taking it from every single developer on the App Store. I don’t understand, why are you pointing fingers at Epic but can’t realize who is really at fault here?
Click to expand...
You do realize this is an industry standard? That Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo demand the same?

They are simply picking a fight because they think they can squeeze more money out of mobile platforms than they have in the past.
 
lolrepeatlol said:
Do people NOT realize when they say this, they are ignoring Apple’s whole part? It’s the company that refuses to back down from their monopolistic 30% cut. They’re taking it from every single developer on the App Store. I don’t understand, why are you pointing fingers at Epic but can’t realize who is really at fault here?
Click to expand...

Thats business for you. Can we argue the same with game developers for free game passes, gems or coins for free? Or how about not having to pay at all for all the in game goodies?
 
There's a contract. You read it. You agree to its terms. You enjoy it for years, making piles of cash, good for you. You can hardly pretend, after all these years, that you actually don't agree with the contract. None of us can. Whether an individual or a company. This is what "contract" and "signing" mean.
Now you can apply this to any company, it's not a matter of how much of an Apple fan or hater you are.
 
The cynic in me thinks this is a retaliatory move from China due to Trump’s upcoming ban on Chinese software.

Epic are 40% owned by Tencent a Chinese company and this has all blown up just after Trump signed the executive order to ban Chinese apps, the timing is too coincidental for my liking.

I guess what they are hoping for is for the courts to side with Epic which will allow 3rd party app stores onto iOS and that way Chinese software can be installed circumventing the ban from Trump. If the Apple cant legally sell Chinese apps in their app store this is the way around it.
 
kengeon said:
Apple went too far by targeting Epic's Unreal game engine, hurting innocent third-party developers who were just trying to have a Mac port. They've proved Epic's point of Apple being a malicious juggernaut.
Click to expand...
Epic went much too far by submitting an app fraudulently that passed the review, but changed its behaviour some time later in a way that would never have passed. And this was part of a campaign, where they already had a lawsuit prepared for when Apple would react exactly as would be expected, given the developer contract.

That's not the base for any business relationship. So Apple is cutting off the business relationship with Epic. That's what any company would do. If your business partner uses underhanded tactics like that, you don't want them as your business partner.

But you are wrong: Epic's Unreal game engine is not affected by this. They can continue to give it to other developers, probably charging 30% of their revenue for it or something like that. They don't need a developer account for that.
 
Lol
Moakesy said:
Question for anyone thinking Epic is doing the right thing here....

How come Epic's discounted rate is 80% of the iOS price, rather than 70%?

Via iOS, it's $9.99. but direct it's $7.99. If they aren't paying Apple the 'unfair against the consumer' 30% cut, why are Epic charging those same consumers more?

In my book, $9.99 less the 30% 'apple tax' is $6.99. Epic is paying the role of consumer champion, whilst actually taking more money for themselves. Sneaky.
Click to expand...
You should think of it the other way too, epic was willing to give up 10% profit so you could download it on the App store and play. If they wanted to recoup the 30% they could have added 10% more to buy on the iOS store. So both would profit them $7.99.
 
supermacman1938 said:
It’s funny to me people can’t understand Apple’s side. They are a business... Apple funds the R&D, designs the hardware, OS, App Store, runs the servers for the apps, markets the apps and some how are expected to do it for what? free, 1% 5% 10% 20%.
Click to expand...
Apple also pays for all the free apps out there, where Apple gets zero percent of nothing. Like on my phone Barclay's Bank app, O2 app, Uber, Netflix, Microsoft Authenticator, NHS patient access. All apps used by 100s of thousands. And Apple takes 30% of nothing to put them on the store. That's what 30% of toys for kiddies that Epic sells is paying for as well.
 
Yann Z said:
There's a contract. You read it. You agree to its terms. You enjoy it for years, making piles of cash, good for you. You can hardly pretend, after all these years, that you actually don't agree with the contract. None of us can. Whether an individual or a company. This is what "contract" and "signing" mean.
Click to expand...
The contract changes all the time, so that that original contract is very different to the latest one. The changes always benefit Apple and rarely benefit the developer. I'm guessing that once developers have invested on the basis of the original contract, then it is financialy and logistically difficult to throw all that away and move to Android etc. Many developers were forced to delete apps that had been around for years due to contract updates. Apple is a bully.
 
Dremmel said:
The contract changes all the time, so that that original contract is very different to the latest one. The changes always benefit Apple and rarely benefit the developer. I'm guessing that once developers have invested on the basis of the original contract, then it is financialy and logistically difficult to throw all that away and move to Android etc. Many developers were forced to delete apps that had been around for years due to contract updates. Apple is a bully.
Click to expand...


How has the contract changed since its inception that is detrimental to the developers in terms of fees charged?
 
cupcakes2000 said:
How has the contract changed since its inception that is detrimental to the developers in terms of fees charged?
Click to expand...
For example, for in-app purchases the fee was 30% flat, now days it is 15% after one year of subscription. That means Epic would be able to pay 15% instead of 30% if they put in place some sort of subscription to buy gems, virtual coins or whatever they “sell” inside their market.
Is that detrimental? Of course not, changes have been made to help developers which are one of the pillars of the iPhone success.
 
D4vidrim said:
For example, for in-app purchases the fee was 30% flat, now days it is 15% after one year of subscription. That means Epic would be able to pay 15% instead of 30% if they put in place some sort of subscription to buy gems, virtual coins or whatever they “sell” inside their market.
Is that detrimental? Of course not, changes have been made to help developers which are one of the pillars of the iPhone success.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree, that’s why I was asking the op I quoted what they meant
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top