Ridley Scott Comments on Epic Games' Parody of His '1984' Ad

[Unregistered 4U]

I agree with the rest of your comment, but I would quibble with this point: It's only "greedy" if Apple is somehow taking advantage of their position to charge more than the alternatives.

And, actually, them LOWERING their cut to a point that would be unsustainable by their competitors WOULD be seen as anti-competitive behavior. Developers would emphatically push all their customers to iOS and why not, it’s where the best deals would be. Some developers may even cut their Android efforts in order to focus on the platform’s store that takes the lower cut.

One of the few benefits Android has is that it’s more open, flexible and configurable. Remove that and you may find yourself in a US where Apple really DOES have a monopoly.

 

[garylapointe]

I think 1% would cover all of it. I don't have any numbers but neither do you.

I think 1% is unrealistic as it depends on how many apps you sell. If you make a billion dollars, then 1% is a lot. If you make $1000, you're looking at a loss to do all the other things.
(There are humans that need a salary for all that development and marketing).

We need the market (alternative app stores) to establish fair pricing.

Which specific apps do you think are unfairly priced BECAUSE they're charged 30% by Apple?

Do you think the price of apps are actually going to drop 20% in price IF Apple charged 10%?

 

[richw2000]

I'm now expecting Apple to announce development of "Apple Reality" as an alternative to "Unreal Engine".... checkmate.

 

[Ethosik]

Basically, this is a good shot at stopping Apple in it’s venture of being as anti-competitive as can be. They can crush any app they like in the App Store with no repercussion - that’s dangerous. Now, not to say that epic is the angelic hero here as they brought this on themselves, but this is the best shot we have.

Crush any app they like in the App Store with no repercussions?

Did you miss it that Epic's app broke the Terms of use that all developers agree to when they sign up? How is Apple at fault here, someone broke the rules, consequences happened.

If I break the rules on Squarespace by starting to post x-rated content, they are free to take my website down because it is against their rules.

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

I do think 30% cut is a bit greedy from Apple. But at the same time nobody is forcing Epic to use the platform.

In this particular case Epic broke the contract end of story, should be nothing here to argue.

What would Epic Games do if a developer did not want to pay the 12% Epic Games Store fee and only gave them 6%?

You are 100% correct, and that is exactly what has happened. However, it is a lose-lose-lose situation, as Epic has lost revenue, Apple has lost revenue, and the users are denied access to Epic games on the iOS/iPadOS platform. The "bit greedy" has caused all of this, so the ball is in Apple's court.

 

[Ethosik]

If Epic can sell apps on their store for 12%, and make a handsome profit, why does Apple's store have to be so much more expensive? The answer is that it's an easy cash cow for Apple and there's no competition for iOS app sales.

Uh lets see. Compare Epic Store with Steam. What is the difference? Oh, right pretty much all community and social interactions possible. Epic Store is just that, a store. Steam offers more than that and takes a 30% cut. Apple is not just a store. They offer APIs, discoverability, assistance, be in between you and your customers where Apple handles disputes/refunds/payment issues and more. I contacted Apple for a refund on a DVD software I bought a few years ago that broke Bluetooth on my Mac. I did not contact the developers of the App. That took time from that Apple Support Engineer's time to handle not an Apple issue, but a third party issue and handled the refund and passed on my complaint. Is that Apple Support Engineer working for free?

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

He didn’t give a take on the fundamental debate on App Store policies.

He basically told Epic they were selfish and petty to waste the remake on a crass business reason, when it could have been used for something with some real meaning... put to better use, that is.

And yet.... he could have done the exact same thing with the original ad, but didn't. Next level hypocrisy from Ridley Scott.

 

[falainber]

I think 1% is unrealistic as it depends on how many apps you sell. If you make a billion dollars, then 1% is a lot. If you make $1000, you're looking at a loss to do all the other things.
(There are humans that need a salary for all that development and marketing).



Which specific apps do you think are unfairly priced BECAUSE they're charged 30% by Apple?

Do you think the price of apps are actually going to drop 20% in price IF Apple charged 10%?

Market is needed to establish the price for app store services.

 

[Ethosik]

Imagine if Microsoft used that argument during their antitrust trial...

"But Your Honor, if computer users don't like us bundling Internet Explorer with Windows OS, then they can build their own computers and create their own OS and browser."

Some people still don't get it.

People please need to stop bringing up the Microsoft trial. At what point did Apple do the following:

1. Try to convince a developer to NOT create an application in their environment (Microsoft tried to get Netscape Navigator development to stop on Windows 95)
2. Once that application was developed, prevented the application from being distributed (approaching OEMs to not install Navigator)
3. Make it more difficult than it needs to to create apps on different platforms (Sun Java arguments in the same case where Microsoft was making Java applications hard to port to and from Windows).

Third party App Stores were always prohibited. So when did Apple approach a developer to convince them NOT to develop something, then tried to make their app be less distributed? Is Apple anti-competitive if I release an X-rated app and it getting rejected?

THAT was the issue Microsoft had in regards to Netscape Navigator and Sun Java. Not because they bundled IE on Windows. Which FYI, Edge is still bundled in Windows 10. So is OneDrive - which competes with Dropbox and others.

 

[Ethosik]

1st, Microsoft had phone based OS well before iOS or Android even existed, and it was crap.
2nd, Epic, if it was so inclined could try to make a phone and attempt to eek out iOS or Android. All they have to do is design it better. Or like Fortnight just copy the exact same thing and add a gimmick.

Epic could use Android right? Its Open Source right?

 

[69Mustang]

Uh lets see. Compare Epic Store with Steam. What is the difference? Oh, right pretty much all community and social interactions possible. Epic Store is just that, a store. Steam offers more than that and takes a 30% cut. Apple is not just a store. They offer APIs, discoverability, assistance, be in between you and your customers where Apple handles disputes/refunds/payment issues and more. I contacted Apple for a refund on a DVD software I bought a few years ago that broke Bluetooth on my Mac. I did not contact the developers of the App. That took time from that Apple Support Engineer's time to handle not an Apple issue, but a third party issue and handled the refund and passed on my complaint. Is that Apple Support Engineer working for free?

Uhhh, what? Did you happen to quote the wrong comment? I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Ethosik]

Apple is greedy and Apple App Store fees are `highway robbery` which is damaging the whole industry and especially the small developers.

I do not want more App Stores on our iPhones as Epic wants. But the 30% cut, on top of all development costs, means the death for many indie developers.

And let's not start with the fact that big names are blatantly violating the rules. Apple pushed Epic out of the app store because as a game they feel this decision is not damaging their business. They won't do the same with the likes of Netflix or Facebook. There is even proof that they give special treatment to them.

What makes the iPhone great? Apple and the App Store. Without Apps, nobody would buy an iPhone. And currently, developers are not happy. Most of them can barely make any money. One never knows when you will get a rejection because of some arbitrary rule. Or maybe the reviewer had a bad day. Who knows. This is preventing developers from even releasing even greater apps.

Just take a look at what recently happened with the WordPress app. Apple apologized because it got media attention. Sadly for one of these, there are many other apps which are rejected for unjust reason of which we hear nothing about.

And to whoever that suggests the web apps. Web apps are broken on iOS. And Apple forbids third-party browsers with proprietary engines in the App Store. All of them must make use of WebKit. There is zero chance we will see Steam or Microsoft releasing their streaming gaming platforms on iOS. And with 30% there is zero incentive. It is just not worth it.

It is time for Apple to change its rules. And I am for once am happy to see Epic fighting this fight.

I am sorry, but what? Do you know how many indie developers have Apps on iOS? How is it the death of indie developers?

 

[Ethosik]

Uhhh, what? Did you happen to quote the wrong comment? I have no idea what you're talking about.

What the heck? Sorry, not sure how your comment got tagged!

Edit: I know what happened, not sure where the post went but others replied to your comment about Epic's 12% profit

If Epic can sell apps on their store for 12%, and make a handsome profit, why does Apple's store have to be so much more expensive? The answer is that it's an easy cash cow for Apple and there's no competition for iOS app sales.

 

[BuffaloTF]

What the heck? Sorry, not sure how your comment got tagged!

Edit: I know what happened, not sure where the post went but others replied to your comment about Epic's 12% profit

It's post #156... if you're looking for any type of notification to go to them to respond at all.

 

[Ethosik]

Apple imposes absurd rules for xCloud and Stadia (they would have to approve any single game) effectively keeping them out of the apple ecosystem because they want to protect their own gaming services. This is an abuse of dominant position as well and it's unfair competition

The problem is making this open for everyone. Sure I can understand the xCloud issue. But that is because its Microsoft. The rules will need to apply to everyone. That means I could create my own "Game streaming" service and have the app approved. What is to stop me from later releasing an x-rated game DEEP in the UI somewhere and a kid finds it? Or even worse, what is to prevent a hacker to create a "game" from Joe's Game Streaming App?

It has to be equal rules across the board. Sure Microsoft and Google are trustworthy, but what about Joe Somebody? A single developer? He might not have the best security around.
[automerge]1599000980[/automerge]

It's post #156... if you're looking for any type of notification to go to them to respond at all.

I have never had an issue quoting before, not sure how this happened. Thanks though

 

[Ethosik]

Well, Epic manage to host their own App Store and make a profit on 12% sales commission for third party apps. Which doesn't really surprise me, because it's not such a hard thing to do.

Epic's store is about 30% of what Steam offers. The community and social features alone are a big difference between Steam and Epic Games Store. Epic just has a bare bones store, so yeah 12% is a profit for them.

 

[BuffaloTF]

The problem is making this open for everyone. Sure I can understand the xCloud issue. But that is because its Microsoft. The rules will need to apply to everyone. That means I could create my own "Game streaming" service and have the app approved. What is to stop me from later releasing an x-rated game DEEP in the UI somewhere and a kid finds it? Or even worse, what is to prevent a hacker to create a "game" from Joe's Game Streaming App?

It has to be equal rules across the board. Sure Microsoft and Google are trustworthy, but what about Joe Somebody? A single developer? He might not have the best security around.
[automerge]1599000980[/automerge]


I have never had an issue quoting before, not sure how this happened. Thanks though

By that same token, Netflix being allowed could open the gate for pr0n hub. But it hasn't. I think this may be simply a case of Apple enforcing, and speaking to the public, on the rules as they exist today. I can't imagine Microsoft isn't in negotiations with them to alter those rules, and they made a public play to win some public support. The app did make it through an entire TestFlight run, after all. They could open it up for Microsoft, Google, Nvidia, Shadow and simply write in the rules that such apps fall under additional scrutiny and need to be vetted prior to a developer account being fully authorized - perhaps no charge on that account until after publication.

 

[Apple_Robert]

I always like the 1984 commercial. I agree with some other posters. Ridley doesn’t have any insider insight into the Epic saga. And the new commercial is a poor parody of the original.

 

[Ethosik]

By that same token, Netflix being allowed could open the gate for pr0n hub. But it hasn't. I think this may be simply a case of Apple enforcing, and speaking to the public, on the rules as they exist today. I can't imagine Microsoft isn't in negotiations with them to alter those rules, and they made a public play to win some public support. The app did make it through an entire TestFlight run, after all. They could open it up for Microsoft, Google, Nvidia, Shadow and simply write in the rules that such apps fall under additional scrutiny and need to be vetted prior to a developer account being fully authorized - perhaps no charge on that account until after publication.

But that P-hub app would first need to be approved. I don't think it would be financially viable for them to create a Netflix Competitor with all these movies that they contracted to just a few months from now switch it to just adult content.

 

[UK-MacAddict]

What about the 30% from google? Or Microsoft? Or Sony? Or Nintendo? Why is epic focusing their attacks only on apple and google?

They are being greedy as well, but this article is about Apple.

 

[Ethosik]

There are multiple comments that have brought this up, so I will just address it openly. I do not think it is helpful to have discussions on greed. Every company in existence is created to make money. I do not see how wanting to make a profit makes someone greedy. Even hospitals are companies that want to earn a profit.

So I don't think 30% is greedy. Its all about the value you get out of a product.

 

[BuffaloTF]

They are being greedy as well, but this article is about Apple.

Are they though? 2019 payouts being 35 billion suggest the revenue was 50... so 15 to them. They then spent 16 billion on R&D for iOS and related product. So, maybe... just maybe... it's a fitting number and that's why everyone charges 30%?

 

[UK-MacAddict]

Excuse me, but if you are talking about "profit margin", that demonstrates that you have no idea what you are talking about.

There is gross margin: If you have an iPhone in one hand and your card in the other hand, how much is Apple better off if you buy that iPhone vs. if you put it back on the shelf? That's gross margin. It doesn't take into account any of the cost that Apple has whether you buy the phone or not. For example, Apple pays the rent for the store, the salary of the employees, all the development cost, advertising, etc. etc. etc. whether you buy the phone or not.

And there is net margin: That number tells you how much money Apple makes from all the phones, taking into account all the cost. That number is a lot lower.

Dropping prices by 30%, Apple would go bankrupt, because the money they make from each sale is not enough to keep the business afloat. But you say "prices are currently on the ridiculous scale". Apple has competitors. The whole Android market mostly (not much else unfortunately). If the prices were "on the ridiculous scale", people wouldn't buy iPhones. Nobody is forcing them. Nobody is pointing a gun at their head. So the prices are what people are willing to pay.

Any way you swing it the current iPhone prices are high. The £400 jump from the iPhone 7 to the X made no sense whatsoever other than greed.

The only difference was the OLED screen and Face ID.

I didn’t say reduce prices by 30% I said reduce it by 10%.

Apple has $200 billion in cash. The rumours of them not including a charger or EarPods in with iPhones this year is ridiculous. Especially if they keep the current prices and we don’t see a reduction in price to reflect those missing items.

 

[ilikewhey]

If you don’t know, it’s fine. I know I don’t, but you tossed it out like you knew. Sorry for asking! Google is my friend.

I do know, did a minor college paper on Rockefeller and his involvement shaping the us economic landscape. So I didn’t just toss it out for no reason 🤔

 

[JKAussieSkater]

This is defeatist thinking. If Apple had looked at the market and said, “No, there’s no way we can ‘make our own’. Plus Nokia has a monopoly on Nokia phones! We’d better just sign up with Motorola” we would have the ROKR today.

That’s not a comparable example. Apple entered the market with their own phones. Microsoft entered the market with their own phones.

You’re ignoring the fact that Microsoft tried in the same way Apple tried just as much as Apple did.

Unless somebody can revolutionise the smartphone space (doubtful, I think smartphones are a “solved” problem now), EPIC Games would be unwise to enter the phone market, unless it was with Android.