Microsoft Supports Epic Games, Says Apple Blocking Access to Unreal Engine Would Harm Game Creators

[PickUrPoison]

The letter was written by Apple's attorneys, not Epic's. There is no mention of 15% or any revenue sharing negotiation in it.

When you say you know what was in the letter, it's very hard to believe you when you are making such fundamental factual errors.

Read their letter again. Last paragraph. Epic clearly wanted a special deal.

I know you want to think that Epic is looking out for all developers, but the fact is Epic doesn’t care about anyone but Epic.

Epic thought they could extract a better deal than 30% without having anything to offer Apple in return. That’s just stupid. What makes Epic think they’re so special? Follow the rules that every other developer follows.

Apple was never going to agree to a 0% deal, with every developer opening their own store. As you know, Epic wouldn’t let anyone on their own platform for 0% revenue share, right?

 

[benthewraith]

Read their letter again. Last paragraph. Epic clearly wanted a special deal.

View attachment 947464


I know you want to think that Epic is looking out for all developers, but the fact is Epic doesn’t care about anyone but Epic.

Epic thought they could extract a better deal than 30% without having anything to offer Apple in return. That’s just stupid. What makes Epic think they’re so special? Follow the rules that every other developer follows.

Apple was never going to agree to a 0% deal, with every developer opening their own store. As you know, Epic wouldn’t let anyone on their own platform for 0% revenue share, right?

Epic has gotten a temporary restraining order against Apple, and by all accounts it sounds like the judge is in favor of Epic in this matter.

In her ruling, the judge pointed out that for one thing, Epic Games International — which owns the Unreal Engine and maintains a contract with Apple for development rights — is a legally separate entity from the Fortnite maker. “For now, Epic International appears to have separate developer program license agreements with Apple and those agreements have not been breached,”

Apple revoking Fortnite from the App Store over the matter seems to be just. But breaking other agreements seems to be retaliatory against Epic. I will not be surprised if the court finds the same.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Epic has gotten a temporary restraining order against Apple, and by all accounts it sounds like the judge is in favor of Epic in this matter.

Epic was not successful in their TRO with respect to Fortnite. Apple will not have to return it to the App Store, and Epic’s developer account will be terminated on Friday.

The part of the judge's decision you quoted only refers to the Unreal Engine, not Fortnite.

 

[PickUrPoison]

They do... brick and mortar stores. I hear you can also purchase games through direct url links outside of the xbox marketplace. This *may* require download from the Xbox marketplace, but Microsoft's cut drops to 5%.

Awesome. But to get in a brick and mortar store, you gotta pay 40-50% to a wholesale distributor. 30% is an awesome deal, as any pre-App Store developer knows only to well.

 

[djphat2000]

The point is that for a game that generates billions of dollars, there are only two stores and those two stores both take exactly the same 30% and there are no alternatives. If I produce a physical game, I can sell in any number of stores, online, direct etc.. and if Best Buy decided to take an unreasonably huge %, you wouldn’t stock it there. Developers have no choice right now but to use the App Store and Play Store.

I agree that if they choose to put it on the App Store they should agree to the T&Cs, but I really do think they should allow 3rd party app stores. They charge £1000 for the hardware, the App Store should be split into an independent legal entity IMO and should allow me to install what I want, from where I want... I don’t mind the risk, and for those that do they can continue to buy from the App Store.

You have other places to sell. That is the point. Apple brough the customers, EPIC didn't.
The App store existed before EPIC Fortinite. Not the other way around.
You don't get to get mad because Apple wants 30%. You have a choice NOT to put your app there. Oh, don't like Google charging 30%. You don't have to put your app there. Sorry you lose out on 100's of millions of customers. But, that is what Apple charges. And Google, and Sony, and Microsoft, and Nintendo.

If they stated "we don't like that everyone charges 30% and we want to compete on their platforms and charge less. They could have an argument. They could take them ALL to court and say they are ALL monopolies. But, they didn't, they messed up and went after the biggest fish.

 

[Wanted797]

You mean force delete off of everyone's phone? I think they only reserve that for malicious apps. Otherwise Epic might make another big deal saying "APPLE CAN FORCE INSTALL AND UNINSTALL ANY APP ON YOUR PHONE".

No. Kill it server side.

 

[benthewraith]

Epic was not successful in their TRO with respect to Fortnite. Apple will not have to return it to the App Store, and Epic’s developer account will be terminated on Friday.

The part of the judge's decision you quoted only refers to the Unreal Engine, not Fortnite.

Which is developed by Epic Intenational.... I never said that Epic Games will have Fortnite back, just that they can't ban the developer account of Epic International.

 

[farewelwilliams]

No. Kill it server side.

Which Epic won’t do.

If they did, they could always reenable after Apple gives back the dev license too.

 

[PickUrPoison]

I don't get it? Why do we all lose? Surely, if you or I want to continue to download trusted apps from the App Store we can. If someone wants to chance it with 3rd party downloads from a 3rd party store, they also can.

I can't believe for a second you only download apps from the Mac Store... do you? I personally download 3rd party apps I know I can trust all the time onto my MacBook and guess what? I've never had an issue and the world still turns. Why is the phone any different. If the OS and hardware is robust, what's the issues?

Indeed, what is the issue?

1) Why is a third-party app store necessary?

2) Why would a legit developer not just use the App Store?

3) Wouldn’t apps on a third party app store still have to pay Apple 30% for IAP?

 

[mi7chy]

Guess that means no Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 on MacOS. Good job Apple.

 

[TracesOfArsenic]

No one has any right to tell a company how to run their business.

Of course not. Companies should be allowed to do what they want. If they want to save money by dumping hazardous chemicals in nearby rivers then by all means do it! If they want to use cheap batteries that explode then I see no issue! In fact, why even test new pharmaceuticals before putting them on the market? That just sounds boring!

 

[cupcakes2000]

Of course not. Companies should be allowed to do what they want. If they want to save money by dumping hazardous chemicals in nearby rivers then by all means do it! If they want to use cheap batteries that explode then I see no issue! In fact, why even test new pharmaceuticals before putting them on the market? That just sounds boring!

100% not the same conversation is it. Come on. It’s like the nutters in other similar threads bringing up Rosa parks or women’s lib or the anti slaving movement. I mean wtf. This is so so so unrelated it’s shocking, or have you Americans really stepped over the edge like we assume you have?!

 

[mateytate]

Indeed, what is the issue?

1) Why is a third-party app store necessary?

2) Why would a legit developer not just use the App Store?

3) Wouldn’t apps on a third party app store still have to pay Apple 30% for IAP?

1. Come on, seriously? There are a ton of apps that Apple will not allow for one reason or another. There are also plenty of apps that on the App Store that have functionality removed/altered to comply with their rules.

2. Because they take 30%? An alternative store offering competition may take less meaning the developer can charge less (though I admit, a developer passing the saving on is unlikely).

3. No, why would they? If I download an app (say, Fortnite) for my MacBook Pro from a Epic Games directly they do not have to pay Apple for any IAP do they. Why is the iPhone somehow different?

 

[PickUrPoison]

1. Come on, seriously? There are a ton of apps that Apple will not allow for one reason or another. There are also plenty of apps that on the App Store that have functionality removed/altered to comply with their rules.

2. Because they take 30%? An alternative store offering competition may take less meaning the developer can charge less (though I admit, a developer passing the saving on is unlikely).

3. No, why would they? If I download an app (say, Fortnite) for my MacBook Pro from a Epic Games directly they do not have to pay Apple for any IAP do they. Why is the iPhone somehow different?

1) You don’t think their would be any rules or restrictions on apps that would be available on third-party app stores? Would Apple allow Xcode to be used to build apps that violate their own rules?

De-bundling all the services included in the current developer fee structure wouldn’t mean devs get to create/install whatever iOS app they might want, or use Apple’s tools or APIs to create rogue/malicious apps, or get a third-party app store to publish their virus-laden crap app.

2) Just because there’s a third party app store doesn’t mean Apple would no longer get paid for apps that run on iOS. Apple might get 25%, and a third party app store might get 4.5 to 5% for hosting and credit card processing fees, for example.

3) Because it has a different developer (and end-user) license agreement, for one. And if Apple so chose, they could restrict MacOS to only install apps from the Mac App Store.

But Apple has to provide an ecosystem that their customers want to buy. I don’t think Mac customers want a closed system; that’s not why they buy Macs. If they don’t give Mac customers what they want, sales of the Mac would dry up.

 

[nickgovier]

.

 

[GizmoDVD]

You are dangerously close to finally getting it. Think about the contradiction between those sentences a little more, and you might just grasp the whole point of what Epic are trying to accomplish.

They are trying to get their App store on iOS.

We all know it. Epic gives no ***** about anyone else but themselves.

 

[pankajdoharey]

The problem is re-writing takes times, testing, not mentioned doing another optimizations. Might be easy for large team with large scale, for individual creators that huge hurdle. Easier said than done.

Rewriting is the only path possible and also expensive but surely the money they save on paying Unreal from their revenues they can use it rewrite it. I agree its not the best choice, but I hope this will spur an era of cutting edge Opensource game engines supported by studios.

 

[PickUrPoison]

You are dangerously close to finally getting it. Think about the contradiction between those sentences a little more, and you might just grasp the whole point of what Epic are trying to accomplish.

I know exactly what they’re trying to accomplish. They want to pay Apple less than 30% for IAP.

Obviously Apple was never going to agree to 0%. Epic knows that—and so do you—so there’s no reason to pretend that is or was their end game. Epic would have been thrilled with a 15% or 20% deal, and Epic’s top management would have shared a few hundred million in bonuses if they had pulled it off.

Apple said, “nope. Read your developer agreement fools. No 8-figure bonuses for you.”

How Epic thought they could extract a better deal when they had nothing of value to offer Apple, I’ll never know. Apparently they don’t realize how inconsequential they are to Apple.

It’s called overplaying your hand. They went all in on an ace high and Apple called their bluff.

 

[nickgovier]

.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Oh man, you were so close to finally understanding what is going on here.

THAT IS EXACTLY THEIR END GAME.

Sit down, because I'm about to blow your mind: Epic currently pays Apple $0 for IAP. Not 30%. Not 15%. Zero.

If you want to buy something from Epic worth $7, then you pay Epic $7, and you pay Apple an extra $3 on top. Or did you genuinely believe developers swallow Apple's fees and don't pass them on to consumers?

Epic wants to be a competing store/payment processor to Apple. So instead of paying $10 for a $7 IAP with $7 going to Epic and the extra $3 going to Apple, Epic wants to give you the option to save $2 by paying Epic $8 in total, $7 for the IAP and just $1 on top for payment processing, instead of Apple's $3. You benefit and Epic benefits, simultaneously. That is their end game.

Some people would still be willing to select the more expensive Apple payment option, for perceived payment security benefits, or convenience, or trust. Some just want to keep donating their hard earned cash to their favourite global corporation. But most consumers are price sensitive, which is why Apple sees this as such a threat and will seek to maintain their monopoly position for as long as they possibly can.

However, on the subject of pretending what Epic's end game is...



You have repeated this nonsense several times now. Either point to any of the public legal documentation where it claims Epic wanted any sort of negotiation about reducing Apple's revenue share, or stop repeating this imaginary tale.

If we agree that Apple was never going to accept Epic’s 0% offer—and why should they, even Epic wants 12%—why do you keep insisting that’s the end game?

Dude, you were so close to realizing how negotiation works: one party often lowballs the other, with the specific intention of meeting somewhere in the middle.

I thought everybody knew that 🤷‍♂️

 

[nickgovier]

.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Everybody except you, it seems. Consider the opening positions of this "negotiation":

1. Epic wants third party stores and payment processing to exist on iOS. This would allow them to offer consumers cheaper pricing, incentivising them to switch, leading to a brand new revenue stream.

2. Apple wants third party stores and payment processing not to exist on iOS, since they currently enjoy all the revenue, and the lack of competition means they have complete freedom to charge consumers whatever percentage of it they like.

3. Apple gets to decide whether third party stores and payment processing exist on iOS.

Do you see why negotiation is impossible in this situation? There is no "somewhere in the middle" for them to meet. That is why Epic had a lawsuit ready to go on day one. If they can successfully argue that Apple is anti-competitive, anti-consumer, a monopoly, too powerful... whatever sticks, they can take the decision on third party stores out of Apple's hands.

Apple refused to negotiate anything, that’s why Epic went thermonuclear with their 0%.

That final demand letter was written after weeks or months of back and forth with Apple not budging from the current dev agreement (30%). No special treatment, sorry Epic. You are NOT special.

It’s foolish for you to think that Epic’s end game is for any dev to be able to open their own store and use their own payment processor. Epic wouldn’t let me on their platform to sell dance moves and outfits for 0% revenue share, why would they think Apple would allow that?

I’ll not engage further unless you can explain, if Epic’s end game is all about third party stores and alternate payment processors as you claim, why they sued Google as well.

 

[nickgovier]

.

 

[PickUrPoison]

<snip>
Because "we can no longer make it available on Play because it violates our policies", namely "developers offering products within a game downloaded on Google Play or providing access to game content must use Google Play In-app Billing as the method of payment."

Sound familiar?

(Gotta love Epic having a “policy” against IAP revenue sharing in first-party stores lol.)

So you finally understand this stunt of Epic’s isn’t to get third party stores and alternate payment processors, which Android already has. Excellent!

But why does Epic think they should be allowed on the Google play Store or App Store for free? I get they want all the benefits of that but aren’t willing to pay for it, but why do they think they’re entitled to that? Would Epic allow me on their store for free to sell dance moves and outfits for 0% IAP revenue share?

PS There’s no outcome where Epic (and every other dev) would get to be in Google Play and the App Store for 0% IAP revenue share. But you think that’s Epic’s end-game based on how they set up this lawsuit lol. Yeah no.

Epic, as they have said many, many times, thinks Apple’s 30% is too high. They obviously feel their 12% fee is just fine though. (And they don’t mind the console makers’ 30% because reasons lol).

High stakes, hardball contract negotiation tactics aren’t always just what they appear to be on the surface. Maybe it’s something that requires some relevant experience to be able to recognize and/or appreciate 🤷‍♂️

 

[nickgovier]

.