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

[xyion1]

I called it:


Only a matter of time until other big players join in for similar reasons (or ditch Apple for gaming, altogether).

A dispute about the Crap Store should have never escalated outside the Crap Store. By threatening the developer account, Apple took this to the Mac where distribution has always happened outside the Crap Store. Apple claimed for years they would only revoke dev certificates / dev accounts for malware purposes. Apple's threat proves they lied and it's always been about control.

I sincerely hope Aug 28 passes and Apple cuts off Epic's dev account as they've threatened. I hope no judge intervenes. The long-term damage Apple would do to itself from that action would be more devastating than any court ruling. It's the only way to break free of the control-freaks in the 1984 ad. Their greed will be their undoing.

No - that's on Epic for using the same developer certificate for Unreal Engine as its other apps. The terms clearly said the developer certificate can be taken down for any violations. Epic's stupidity does not make this an emergency.

Apple is not revoking the developer certificate out of spite; it is revoking it for breaking the terms of the license, and it provided a method of keeping the certificate (resubmit the app without the alternate payment - it even said plain and clear that they can keep the lawsuit, just update the app in the interim). Epic can easily comply to keep its Unreal Engine developers out of harm, if it wants to.

 

[springsup]

Epic can easily comply to keep its Unreal Engine developers out of harm, if it wants to.

This. As Apple said, Epic could have brought the lawsuit and challenged the legality of their rules without risking their developer account being terminated.

They took this approach, and sacrificed Fortnite, for maximum PR. By doing that, they threw their Unreal Engine customers under the bus. If they had taken the responsible, adult approach and left it up to the courts, this wouldn’t be a risk.

Epic done goofed. I wonder if their customers can sue them for breach of contract if they can no longer service UE for Apple devices.

 

[Ricebucket]

Well, I'm a small independent developer and I disagree. The 30% is fair for what is offered from Apple's side: tax documentation, billing arrangements in different countries, visibility on the App Store, detailed metrics on usage, and more...

I dislike how 'independent developers' are OK with this until they suddenly become huge companies with million dollar budgets (and profits) - then it's suddenly 'unfair' because what they're paying Apple now amounts to millions of dollars (even though it's still the same 15/30%). It's disgusting actually, and I'll be really annoyed if the big developers pay less proportionally than the smaller ones - that's really unfair (you know, like the US tax system... great model that).

So if actions by other developers cause you to have to pay only 20%. You wouldn't take that discount?

 

[DeepIn2U]

Apple has to lose this. The conditions are daylight robbery. I find the epic promo video amazingly valid.
Back then Apple opposed MS as being the bully and now it is the same but Apple is the bully.
Hahahaha, how things change.

If you're referring to the Rotten Apple ad by Epic and stating 'back then Apple opposed MS' ... Apple opposed IBM as they were the major computer company known in the world, everyone was still at an upstart stage with 1-5% market relevance. Big names existed but IBM was getting the corporate deals and handshakes and the personal market was wide open.

Have a deep dive into Apple's Play Store policies in full. Have a deep dive into Epic's Store Policies and their practices with developers. You have a right to your opinion however base it on facts, please.

Cheers.

 

[endlessike]

In my opinion canceling the developers membership is abusive and Apple deserves to lose. Pulling the offending game is one thing, taking retaliatory actions is another. I am surprised their anti-trust counsel would permit this to go forward. It’s stupid and makes them look terrible.

They just painted a giant target on their back for a future Biden DOJ

 

[Analog Kid]

Apple is operating a monopoly

Maybe you can articulate this better that others seem to be able to. In what market does Apple hold a monopoly?

 

[now i see it]

Reminds me of 1776. Taxation without representation is tyranny- or something to that effect. Maybe this is the ground movement towards a revolution.

 

[brynsmith23]

It's Apples App platform, they can charge what they like and around 30% is the going rate for most platforms, if Epic don't like it then they can start up there own Eco System.

 

[xyion1]

So if actions by other developers cause you to have to pay only 20%. You wouldn't take that discount?

Everybody seems to think there will be a discount! If the IAP drops to 20-10-5-0%, then the yearly developer cost will increase to match.

Developers who make money directly on the app store pay 30% to subsidize everybody who does not provide revenue through IAP (ad supported, basecamp, hey.com, netflix.com, etc.).

If everybody bailed, then Apple is not going to say, "aw shucks, you're right!", out of benevolence. The yearly developer cert could become $1,000/yr+ individual licensing per technology/API (metal, push notifications, test flight etc.) and the number of available developers will collapse due to the high entry fee, and then everybody will gripe that "the rich keep getting richer" because no one else competes. Flat 30% for everybody is literally the most fair*. The big companies are complaining because popular apps make a lot of money and they are beholden to their own shareholders (or, want to maximize profits for themselves, privately).

*in response to Amazon Video 15%, Apple was given a concession on Amazon.com (special page design and check out experience w/ recommended products) - Epic did not offer any such thing as recompense to offset the loss of direct revenue (all 30%, as it were). It seems Apple felt that the offset Amazon proposed was worthwhile for the initial 15% for the first year. That's business.

 

[Ricebucket]

Apples feels that 30% is fair, based on their valuation of Apple’s technology, tools and software for the development, testing and distribution of developers’ apps and digital content.

Including (their list not mine):

• All Apple software, SDKs, APIs, and developer tools
• Pre-release versions of iOS, iPad OS, macOS, tvOS, watchOS
• Pre-release versions of beta tools such as Reality Composer, Create ML, Apple Configurator, etc.
• Notarization service for macOS apps
• App Store Connect platform and support (for example, assistance with account transition, password reset, app name issues)
• TestFlight
• Access to provisioning portal for certificate generation, and provisioning profile generation
• Ability to enable Apple services in-app (i.e. Apple Pay, CloudKit, PassKit, Music Kit, HomeKit, Push Notifications, Siri Shortcuts, Sign in with Apple, kernel extensions, FairPlay Streaming)
• Access to Apple-issued keys for connecting to services such as MusicKit, DeviceCheck, APNs, CloudKit, Wallet
• Access to Developer ID signing certificates and Kernel Extension signing certificates - Developer Technical Support
• Participation in Universal App Quick Start Program, including the right to use the Developer Transition Kit (which must be returned to Apple)
• Engineering efforts to improve hardware and software performance of Unreal Engine on Mac and iOS hardware; optimize Unreal Engine on the Mac for creative workflows, virtual sets and their CI/Build Systems; and adoption and support of ARKit features and future VR features into Unreal Engine by their XR team

Notice the last bullet - Apple devoted engineering resources to make Unreal engine perform better on it's platforms - this is directly to the benefit of Epic and the developers that purchase the license from Epic. Apple did not mention an additional cost to do this, that I could find anywhere.

You are free to disagree whether that is worth 30% or not; Apple feels that it is. Maybe in time it can be "unbundled", I don't know - but for now (much like my cable and cell phone bill) it is what it is, (and I'm free to switch if I don't like the costs, even if it disrupts my ability to perform work from home).

This is a strawman argument. I don't think anyone is arguing that the services provided by Apple are worthless, including Epic. The question is whether they are allowing competition to exist on the app store so that a more accurate equilibrium price can arrive via market means.

In Epic's case, we're talking about hundreds of millions of dollars a quarter! The services you're talking about are not worth that much. In fact, I am willing to bet the $99 charged by Apple for the developer access to all developers is more than sufficient to cover all.

But if you want, we can be more generous. Look at development tools sold by Microsoft or pro tools sold by Adobe or even Apple itself. We're talking about thousands of dollars at most. Let's boost that number by a factor of 10 (!!), to include whatever else you may want to add, and we're still only talking about tens of thousands of dollars vs hundreds of million.

And let's not forget the tremendous benefits that Apple is receiving from having killer apps on the store. In this case, that's hundreds of millions a quarter in direct revenue. And then there are indirect benefits that boost sales and support the success of the iOS platform.

 

[djjeff]

uh - on Apples platform, Apple is right. If Epic doesn't like the terms, they can leave and sue (which, they did already). If they break the terms, they can be escorted out (developer cert revoked). If Epic didn't think through all the consequences of their actions (Unreal Engine being in jeopardy), that's on them.

There are plenty of items in the world that I feel are overpriced (Tesla Model 3 w/ Autopilot, for example) - by your logic, should I just take it and say "Elon - no fair, the price was higher than I wanted to pay, but I still wanted it so you need to give it to me"

The question is: Are those other things considered a monopoly? It's my opinion Apple and the App Store are and therefore are subject to regulation.

 

[Radeon85]

It's Apples App platform, they can charge what they like and around 30% is the going rate for most platforms, if Epic don't like it then they can start up there own Eco System.

The already have, it's called the Epic game store. Of course they can't open their own store on Apples platform due to the pathetic limitations. Apple can still be a walled garden but they just need to loosen their restrictions a bit.

 

[Spectrum]

As an analogy... This is like if I built a Bricks and mortar store and then idiot Sweeney / Epic walked in and demanded to be allowed to set up a stall to sell their fortnite rubbish and not pay any rent or services.

Exactly!

 

[djjeff]

MacOS has always been open same as Windows. iOS Platform has never been open.

Hence the problem.

 

[BGPL]

Apple is incredibly greedy. It's time to bring balance back to the force.

 

[cuhulin]

Apple only has to lose once: whether it be to Epic in California, Spotify in Europe, congress, or another country that wants its own app on without being blocked such as India. And if Apple doesn’t do something themselves, the result could be catastrophic for Apple such as: (1) being required to break off the App Store from Apple, (2) requiring that the App Store not be installed by default (aka downloaded from the internet), or (3) Allowing unrestricted browser downloads of apps. Apple should really just cut their fee in half to end most of this controversy, because this will likely be a losing battle in the long run.

And if they cut the fee in half to 15%, someone like Epic will then complain that 15% is too much. They want Apple to pay the distribution costs of their games for them, no more and no less. I hope the judge sees through this tomorrow and bounces Epic out of court on their injunction motions.

Then Cook should call Sweeney and say that he wishes Sweeney the best of luck, but Apple has decided not to do business with Epic any more.

 

[frenchcamp49er]

Figures Microcrap and creepy Bill have always hated Apple

 

[frenchcamp49er]

Epic is totally wrong, they agreed to the terms. Isn’t there another engine that mobile developers are using more now anyway

 

[Ricebucket]

Everybody seems to think there will be a discount! If the IAP drops to 20-10-5-0%, then the yearly developer cost will increase to match.

Developers who make money directly on the app store pay 30% to subsidize everybody who does not provide revenue through IAP (ad supported, basecamp, hey.com, netflix.com, etc.).

If everybody bailed, then Apple is not going to say, "aw shucks, you're right!", out of benevolence. The yearly developer cert could become $1,000/yr+ individual licensing per technology/API (metal, push notifications, test flight etc.) and the number of available developers will collapse due to the high entry fee, and then everybody will gripe that "the rich keep getting richer" because no one else competes. Flat 30% for everybody is literally the most fair*. The big companies are complaining because popular apps make a lot of money and they are beholden to their own shareholders (or, want to maximize profits for themselves, privately).

*in response to Amazon Video 15%, Apple was given a concession on Amazon.com (special page design and check out experience w/ recommended products) - Epic did not offer any such thing as recompense to offset the loss of direct revenue (all 30%, as it were). It seems Apple felt that the offset Amazon proposed was worthwhile for the initial 15% for the first year. That's business.

How is 30% for all games fair compared to $1000/year+ in developer costs? You do realize that Epic alone is paying hundreds of millions of dollars a quarter right? If Apple offered them to pay $1000/year+ instead, they'll take it in a heartbeat. And you do realize that companies like Uber are not paying anything even though they're also offering in-app payment and making billions right?

Moreover, in another thread, I've analyzed the costs of providing the cloud services that Apple provides. And it is minuscule compared to the revenue they're generating. (For comparison, see entire platforms supported by ads only.) I'm willing to bet the $99 that Apple already charges is sufficient to cover all of these costs.

 

[rwxx]

The Fortnite dispute has nothing to do with the Unreal Engine. I doubt Epic anticipated that Apple would revoke their developer membership, but that move has really played nicely into Epic's hands. This is classic monopolist bullying behavior on Apple's part and it looks very very bad from the outside.

I don't like the idea of a single App Store (on any platform). Even more worrisome is the thought that some corporation can turn off access to the software I use, and maybe rely upon for my living, whenever they see fit. No one should have this kind of control over any platform. It's scary to think where this could lead.

Third party developers who use the Unreal Engine have absolutely nothing to do with Epic's Fortnite drama. Nothing. Zip. Zero. And Apple is going to punish them in order to punish Epic. No one should be cheering this kind of behavior. It's shocking that Apple would behave this way.

 

[PickUrPoison]

No one, at least not that I've seen, is saying Apple shouldn't be compensated for the frameworks / tools Apple has made. I don't have any objection if Apple charges for said items. However that's not the same as prohibiting developers from side loading applications.

That compensation (30/15) is exactly what people are complaining about though.

Who wants to build and maintain their own App Store when Apple provides one already? Or do people think Apple would no longer charge the same rates if side loading were allowed...

 

[Ricebucket]

And if they cut the fee in half to 15%, someone like Epic will then complain that 15% is too much. They want Apple to pay the distribution costs of their games for them, no more and no less. I hope the judge sees through this tomorrow and bounces Epic out of court on their injunction motions.

Then Cook should call Sweeney and say that he wishes Sweeney the best of luck, but Apple has decided not to do business with Epic any more.

If only there's an economic system in which a just price can be obtained for both sides... Oh wait...
Unfortunately, Apple is not allowing competing stores on iOS, hence the crux of Epic's argument.

 

[frenchcamp49er]

How is 30% for all games fair compared to $1000/year+ in developer costs? You do realize that Epic alone is paying hundreds of millions of dollars a quarter right? If Apple offered them to pay $1000/year+ instead, they'll take it in a heartbeat. And you do realize that companies like Uber are not paying anything even though they're also offering in-app payment and making billions right?

Moreover, in another thread, I've analyzed the costs of providing the cloud services that Apple provides. And it is minuscule compared to the revenue they're generating. (For comparison, see entire platforms supported by ads only.) I'm willing to bet the $99 that Apple already charges is sufficient to cover all of these costs.

Isn’t that the deal they agreed too? If they didn’t like it they shouldn’t have agreed to it, Epic sounds like a shady company and maybe the regulators should take a very close look at them.

 

[Ricebucket]

The Fortnite dispute has nothing to do with the Unreal Engine. I doubt Epic anticipated that Apple would revoke their developer membership, but that move has really played nicely into Epic's hands. This is classic monopolist bullying behavior on Apple's part and it looks very very bad from the outside.

I don't like the idea of a single App Store (on any platform). Even more worrisome is the thought that some corporation can turn off access to the software I use, and maybe rely upon for my living, whenever they see fit. No one should have this kind of control over any platform. It's scary to think where this could lead.

Third party developers who use the Unreal Engine have absolutely nothing to do with Epic's Fortnite drama. Nothing. Zip. Zero. And Apple is going to punish them in order to punish Epic. No one should be cheering this kind of behavior. It's shocking that Apple would behave this way.

Epic wanted Apple to overreact. The more the better, as it makes Epic's case for abusive behavior. Hence why they updated the app to push for the ban before filing the lawsuit.

Let's also realize that if Unreal Engine games break, Apple will directly lose billions of dollars in revenue. Unreal Engine games are everywhere on the App store.
[automerge]1598235715[/automerge]

Isn’t that the deal they agreed too? If they didn’t like it they shouldn’t have agreed to it, Epic sounds like a shady company and maybe the regulators should take a very close look at them.

I believe the entire lawsuit means Epic doesn't agree to the deal? How is this shady?

 

[cuhulin]

No, it does not. Stop trying to deflect from Apple's monopolistic practices by trying to compare them to another companies potential monopolistic practices.

Apple's practices are not monopolistic. What's the monopoly? When you walk into the Apple store, should Dell be able to say "we want to use that table to sell our products?" or Ford be able to sell parts for Jeeps and claim a right to have them covered under the Jeep warranty? There are competing platforms. If one wants to sell into a platform one follows the rules for that platform. That is not monopoly, it is free market competition.