Fortnite's Return to iOS in the UK Uncertain as Epic Games Criticizes 'Weak' Apple Regulations

[Necro69]

Oh poor whittle baby billionaire upset that Apple won't go out of their way to accommodate. We want to sue you for hundred of millions of dollars and we also want our game to be top your list...lol! Why are crapy CEO's named Tim?

 

[BOB-86]

I like the idea of Apples walled garden, they should be allowed to refuse apps access to the App Store.

 

[bluecoast]

Epic are as annoying and self serving as much as they are right.

I enter my payment details to different companies on something they have called ‘websites’ on ‘the internet’ and it’s ok.

Moreover these companies can change their content on these websites and have full control over what and when they publish.

And even more radical - apart from the cut that they pay to visa or PayPal etc thru get to keep the money from each sale.

Apparently they don’t need to give any cut to whoever runs ‘the internet’.

I know, amazing right?

 

[drrich2]

Personally I think it a little tragic more people don't take more of an interest in their cars but then the future is EVs which remain largely impenetrable even to enthusiasts.

These days people are bombarded with a range of concerns they're told they ought to take an interest in - investing for retirement, various political concerns, climate change, various charitable causes, etc... And the practical reality in the U.S. today is the 2-income family (well, if you've got 2 parents in the home), and a lot of people don't own a shop with tools...some don't even have much in the way of yards. I get what you're saying, but people are getting a bit of 'ought to' exhaustion. And if you're religious, there are likely more 'ought tos.'

I enter my payment details to different companies on something they have called ‘websites’ on ‘the internet’ and it’s ok.

I do, too, but not everyone does. Some people don't do much online purchasing, or do it almost exclusively through recognized big brand sites (and even then, they can be vulnerable to phishing schemes).

And then there are the big data breaches that are all to common. Any of you guys ever get notices that your e-mail and some login password are on the 'dark web?' I remember when passwords were kinda short and easy to remember; these days it's safer to use MacOS's password generator or a 3rd party password generate to produce weird, complex passwords that aren't memorable, and even then, 2-factor authentication is sometimes wise.

But so many people don't operate on that level of sophistication. I suspect it's more common with people who do nearly all their personal 'computing' on smart phones.

 

[The_Gream]

I don’t have a link, but the Netherlands are currently bringing a lawsuit against Plantation for their digital store. Give it time and everything will be messed up.

 

[breenmask]

To be fair we could level the exact same complaint at Tim Cook.

Considering App Store has loosened its rules and fees since inception, not really.

Apple actively choose the side of their shareholders

Apple chose the side of the majority of users. Making it simple and feel secure to buy things on iOS.

Apple could have chosen to rid themselves of 100% of their international litigation

Choose to satisfy external factors that hinders UX. Nah.

by just bringing the iPhone (and iPad) up to software installation parity with the Mac and be done with it.

I'm willing to wager most users prefer iPhone installation process over Mac's installation process.

They could have implemented the per-app installation permission Android has,

Or users can simply buy an Android if they prefer that way.

But they chose not to for a reason and its not to help users or developers in any way.

Chose for a balance between users/developers satisfaction. Majority are fine with it.

 

[breenmask]

Except it’s to satiate the big players demand cause those big players hold big cash, that can swing a nation easily at whatever direction they desire. Welcome to America.

Tim Sweeney is worth more than Tim Cook FYI.
Unreal Engine has about similar % marketshare as to iOS.
Epic Games Store is roughly the same % marketshare too.

 

[Ctrlos]

Considering App Store has loosened its rules and fees since inception, not really.



Apple chose the side of the majority of users. Making it simple and feel secure to buy things on iOS.



Choose to satisfy external factors that hinders UX. Nah.



I'm willing to wager most users prefer iPhone installation process over Mac's installation process.



Or users can simply buy an Android if they prefer that way.



Chose for a balance between users/developers satisfaction. Majority are fine with it.

Re-read the post: I was saying what Apple could theoretically do to end it's litigation woes, not what users want nor what they should do.

 

[breenmask]

Re-read the post: I was saying what Apple could theoretically do to end it's litigation woes, not what users want nor what they should do.

Re-read? Sure.
You said "Apple actively choose the side of their shareholders"

I'm countering what you said what Apple is actively doing. Apple isn't actively doing that, but actively choosing the side of UX.

 

[Ctrlos]

Re-read? Sure.
You said "Apple actively choose the side of their shareholders"

I'm countering what you said what Apple is actively doing. Apple isn't actively doing that, but actively choosing the side of UX.

The whole of OS26 shows that Apple aren't doing a damned thing about UX. Their cultural goals of late are protectionist rather than innovative, concerned more with being right than doing what's right. They are more concerned with maintaining their bottom line, sending staff off to willingly commit perjury in the name of profits.

Do I still think they make great products. Yes. Do I use them? Absolutely. But let's not pretend for one minute that the 2025 version of Apple is any better than Google, Meta or OpenAI.

 

[surferfb]

The whole of OS26 shows that Apple aren't doing a damned thing about UX. Their cultural goals of late are protectionist rather than innovative, concerned more with being right than doing what's right. They are more concerned with maintaining their bottom line, sending staff off to willingly commit perjury in the name of profits.

Do I still think they make great products. Yes. Do I use them? Absolutely. But let's not pretend for one minute that the 2025 version of Apple is any better than Google, Meta or OpenAI.

I couldn't disagree more strongly, and think this is why a lot of us will never agree on these regulations. Of course if that's how you view Apple, then of course you think the reasons for pushing back is nefarious and just about profits. And you are absolutely entitled to your opinion. That's how you feel.

But I think you're wildly off the mark, and to argue Apple isn't any better than Google or Meta is borderline laughable if you actually look at the companies. And, if you feel like I do, that Apple, while making missteps here and there, are on the whole looking out for their customers, then you're more likely to trust they're coming from a good place and not just profits. I'm sure you think I'm naive, or just carrying Apple's water, or whatever, but the fact of the matter is Apple is very clear about why they think these regulations are bad, and I agree with them! There arguments make sense to me, and align to my thoughts on computing for the mass market.

And regulators and those defending the regulators ignore those arguments entirely, jump to "it's only about profits", or "the security concerns are FUD" and never address them, never acknowledge the changes required by regulators do negatively impact large swaths or Apple's customers, and that a large number of users might actually prefer Apple's closed ecosystem. Gaslight us and say "taking away your preferred option is increasing choice" or "my preferences are more important than yours and the platform owners just because." (Not saying this is you to be clear, but just how these arguments in general go).

 

[MyOwnDrummer]

Sweeney whines again. Does he do anything else?

 

[drrich2]

But I think you're wildly off the mark, and to argue Apple isn't any better than Google or Meta is borderline laughable if you actually look at the companies.

Beyond whatever one thinks of their key upper level administrators' views and policies, market realities dictate a lot of corporate practice, and these companies are different.

Apple and Facebook are sometimes contrasted like the privacy champion vs. the addictive algorithm-crafting 'data whore' (my term), but Apple makes money off sales of hardware and services (e.g.: iCloud, AppleCare+, app. store fees), not selling our data. Facebook, by comparison, makes money by monetizing being the focus of 'user eyeballs,' so selling ads is key. Similarly, Facebook can talk smack against Apple by advocating for open platforms, opposing restrictions on app.s, etc..., since Facebook benefits from unrestricted openness and would likely prefer to have a strong presence on every platform. Google's reliance in Search-related business is a bit different, and a key vulnerability - we could probably all switch to Bing without losing too much, free and easy, and Google (Alphabet) knows that.

So of course these companies behave differently. Whatever degree you do or don't credit a given company with a higher degree of ethical/moral governance, the practical demands of the market will make them behave differently.

There are exceptions. Not sure we can blame practical demands of the market for Sweeney.

 

[breenmask]

The whole of OS26 shows that Apple aren't doing a damned thing about UX.

Subjective. I think they are. Maybe you don't like it, maybe you think it goes in the opposite direction of a usable experience but fact is the *intention* by Apple is for sure doing it for UX. Again, whether they hit that mark is subjective.

 

[Ctrlos]

I couldn't disagree more strongly, and think this is why a lot of us will never agree on these regulations. Of course if that's how you view Apple, then of course you think the reasons for pushing back is nefarious and just about profits. And you are absolutely entitled to your opinion. That's how you feel.

But I think you're wildly off the mark, and to argue Apple isn't any better than Google or Meta is borderline laughable if you actually look at the companies. And, if you feel like I do, that Apple, while making missteps here and there, are on the whole looking out for their customers, then you're more likely to trust they're coming from a good place and not just profits. I'm sure you think I'm naive, or just carrying Apple's water, or whatever, but the fact of the matter is Apple is very clear about why they think these regulations are bad, and I agree with them! There arguments make sense to me, and align to my thoughts on computing for the mass market.

And regulators and those defending the regulators ignore those arguments entirely, jump to "it's only about profits", or "the security concerns are FUD" and never address them, never acknowledge the changes required by regulators do negatively impact large swaths or Apple's customers, and that a large number of users might actually prefer Apple's closed ecosystem. Gaslight us and say "taking away your preferred option is increasing choice" or "my preferences are more important than yours and the platform owners just because." (Not saying this is you to be clear, but just how these arguments in general go).

I feel the Apple that I grew to respect just doesn't exist anymore. From where I'm standing they've gotten to the top and it's made them complacent and culturally hubristic.

They continue to bring out the occasional head-turner (like the M4 Mini) alongside solid reliable products but their rivals are running rings around them and it is only the ecosystem that keeps them going. Apple might not look like theyre going anywhere any time soon but we once said the same about Nokia and HTC.

I see the OS26 changes and I really don't like them at all. My biggest worry is they've poisoned the well inside the walled garden. Feedback seems to be unanimously negative across the board and when it looked like they were moving in the right direction they went back.

Now my opinion doesn't count for anything but for what it's worth I've spent over two decades working in industrial design and if I don't like it, what is a mass market that cannot undo the changes going to do: wait it out or look elsewhere?

Competitor handsets have been knocking it out of the park this year, from the Nothing 3a and the Pixel 9a squashing in value to the 2nd coming of the Galaxy Fold.

 

[Krizoitz]

I don't give two hoots about Epic, Fortnite or Tim Sweeney, but I do think it's time for Apple to play nice, open up more, and allow users the OPTION to leave the walled garden at our own risk. And no, I don't mean switching to Android. Simple options to install non app store apps, use different NFC options, set more default options etc. They are slowly doing it, but not fast enough.

Switching to Android IS the option.

Apple shouldn’t be compelled to do any of the things you mention. They are nowhere near a monopoly. Don’t like how they do things? But a different product, of which there are many MANY options.

 

[Shirasaki]

Tim Sweeney is worth more than Tim Cook FYI.
Unreal Engine has about similar % marketshare as to iOS.
Epic Games Store is roughly the same % marketshare too.

Last time I checked Epic Games had no presence in the mobile world, as in, they don’t produce phones tablets etc.
I guess they are big players in the gaming world, but has a vastly smaller market value than Apple does. So, Epic Games is still a small player in comparison.

 

[TracesOfArsenic]

Can someone ask Tim why I can't download Fortnite on Steam?

Thanks.

No need, it's a common sense answer: Microsoft (AKA the platform maker) allows Windows (AKA the platform) to have multiple stores (AKA Epic, Steam, Microsoft, Ubisoft, etc and even the internet in general).

 

[breenmask]

Last time I checked Epic Games had no presence in the mobile world, as in, they don’t produce phones

Sounds like they should. Imagine if we dictated the rules of the epic games store to not have preferential treatment for unreal engine games.

 

[Shirasaki]

Sounds like they should. Imagine if we dictated the rules of the epic games store to not have preferential treatment for unreal engine games.

Maybe platform owners (including epic game store) should be regulated to not have much say on what they should or should not be on it. But I guess the ship has long since sailed and it is what it is now.

 

[breenmask]

Maybe platform owners (including epic game store) should be regulated to not have much say on what they should or should not be on it.

I prefer to have competition to ultimately improve all platforms without the addition of more regulations.

 

[drrich2]

Maybe platform owners (including epic game store) should be regulated to not have much say on what they should or should not be on it.

So what happens when someone wants to stick a game with (legal) porn on their game store? Or one with obnoxious political messages? Or severe profanity? Some vendors may prefer 'family friendly' fare, not running what in the U.S. used to be called a 'red light district.'

One of the key problems with regulation is it can fail to ask the question 'How can bad people misuse this? What could a trouble maker do with this?'

And why can't a company control their own platform that they created and pay for? Especially when there are viable alternatives (such as Android's side-loading).

You've objected to 'addictive' social media content being available for at-will use (e.g.: by minors), yet propose maybe platform owners shouldn't have much say on what they should or shouldn't have to host on their own platforms.

So then what happens? Government has to regulate what's allowed on those platforms, which platforms, under what conditions, etc... It escalates government control.

You seem more comfortable with government bureaucrats running the show than private company management, despite the fact we're talking about the companies' platforms.

 

[bluecoast]

These days people are bombarded with a range of concerns they're told they ought to take an interest in - investing for retirement, various political concerns, climate change, various charitable causes, etc... And the practical reality in the U.S. today is the 2-income family (well, if you've got 2 parents in the home), and a lot of people don't own a shop with tools...some don't even have much in the way of yards. I get what you're saying, but people are getting a bit of 'ought to' exhaustion. And if you're religious, there are likely more 'ought tos.'


I do, too, but not everyone does. Some people don't do much online purchasing, or do it almost exclusively through recognized big brand sites (and even then, they can be vulnerable to phishing schemes).

And then there are the big data breaches that are all to common. Any of you guys ever get notices that your e-mail and some login password are on the 'dark web?' I remember when passwords were kinda short and easy to remember; these days it's safer to use MacOS's password generator or a 3rd party password generate to produce weird, complex passwords that aren't memorable, and even then, 2-factor authentication is sometimes wise.

But so many people don't operate on that level of sophistication. I suspect it's more common with people who do nearly all their personal 'computing' on smart phones.

Good point. I use a junk email and that I suspect, has been in data breaches multiple times.

Agree with your point that people with one primary email are at risk at getting spammed & that buying via apple is probably safer.

I never used to get spam calls or spam iMessages - now I get several a month. Again I suspect that this is due to breaches.

For that reason I prefer to use shopify and PayPal supported sites, but if you’re getting stuff delivered to you, at some point whoever holds your details needs to pass the details to the vendor & thus your details are then vulnerable.

Hmph I don’t know. In the end, I just don’t like it that apple feels entitled to taking their cut after 17 years of the App Store. I just disagree with it - and much prefer the e-commerce experience on the Mac, where I think an excellent balance has been found.

 

[laptech]

This is how a company blackmails a government into giving it what it wants. There will be many people in the UK who are of voting age who play Fortnite and to hear Fornite will not be returning to iOS in the UK because of something the UK government is not doing, those voting people will not vote for the political that is in power when the next general election comes because these Fortnite players will be thinking 'Why should I vote for you, you stopped me from being able to play on my Apple iphone/ipad'.

Yes we all know the issues of what Epic is doing goes way way deeper but many voters are fickle people, they do not care about the deeper issues, all they care about is wanting to play something they cannot because the government is not allowing them to. THAT is how they see it and that is how Epic are hoping it is going to go.

If the UK government does not punish Apple in the manner Epic wants them too they will refuse to bring Fortnite back to iOS in the UK and UK players will blame the UK government for it and will not vote for them come the next general election.

 

[Shirasaki]

I prefer to have competition to ultimately improve all platforms without the addition of more regulations.

I would hope free market can always work wonders without any problem. Then I can get behind less regulation.