Epic Games wanted a special deal for 'Fortnite' on the App Store

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 77
    I, for one, would like to have at least the option to side load an alternate app store on some of my iOS devices. Sure that would possibly compromise their security but I will just be playing games on them, so I am not sure it matters really. Keep trying to convince me that I don't know what I want. That's what Apple thinks.
    elijahg
  • Reply 42 of 77
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,362member
    Just read the entire 34 pages. 

    To say they legally decimated Tim Sweeney would be an understatement. Jesus Christ.

    I feel extreme pity for anyone who actually reads the fundamental facts of this case and still takes Epic's side. What a pathetic charade. 
    Pascalxxcastcoreqwerty52foregoneconclusionbasjhjGG1aderutteruraharaspock1234pscooter63
  • Reply 43 of 77
    slurpy said:
    Just read the entire 34 pages. 

    To say they legally decimated Tim Sweeney would be an understatement. Jesus Christ.

    I feel extreme pity for anyone who actually reads the fundamental facts of this case and still takes Epic's side. What a pathetic charade. 
    I just read it.  You are absolutely right!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 44 of 77
    I, for one, would like to have at least the option to side load an alternate app store on some of my iOS devices. Sure that would possibly compromise their security but I will just be playing games on them, so I am not sure it matters really. Keep trying to convince me that I don't know what I want. That's what Apple thinks.
    If you are so adamant that you know that the apps you want to side load are safe then just jailbreak your device.  

    Apple’s walled garden isn’t something new, and based on all of the exploits that some foreign governments are using to gain access to a device is proof why Apple will never allow side loading. 

    You want security and privacy until it’s an inconvenience for you. You can’t have it both ways.

    Like others here have stated ad nauseam, the fact that other platforms where you can buy apps and games have similar agreements, but they are not under fire and that proves that Apple is being singled out to extort money under the guise to make things more “fair” between device manufacturers and developers. 


    Rayz2016hlee1169aderutterspock1234pscooter63killroyjahbladewatto_cobra
  • Reply 45 of 77
    I, for one, would like to have at least the option to side load an alternate app store on some of my iOS devices. Sure that would possibly compromise their security but I will just be playing games on them, so I am not sure it matters really. Keep trying to convince me that I don't know what I want. That's what Apple thinks.
    You can.  On an inferior and less secure platform:  Android.  Wanna know one reason why it's inferior and less secure?  Side loading from alternate sources, many of which are based in God-knows-where, slipping God-knows-what onto people's devices.

    I like having a more secure platform without that crap out there infecting the rest of us too.
    hammeroftruthcastcorehlee1169aderutterspock1234pscooter63watto_cobra
  • Reply 46 of 77
    mistergsf said:
    slurpy said:
    Just read the entire 34 pages. 

    To say they legally decimated Tim Sweeney would be an understatement. Jesus Christ.

    I feel extreme pity for anyone who actually reads the fundamental facts of this case and still takes Epic's side. What a pathetic charade. 
    I just read it.  You are absolutely right!
    Agreed. Apple's argument is pretty convincing. However, this legal discussion is mainly about whether Epic deserves an emergency injunction - which it does not.

    From the case: "Epic’s success does not entitle it to have this Court step in and remedy the harm it knowingly created, nor is there any legal basis for that. If Epic is looking for immediate relief for its customers, it can remove its “hotfix,” continue to comply with the contracts it signed and that apply to everyone else, and go on to pursue its legal challenge in this Court."

    "
    The only real issue for Epic is the commission which it does not wish to pay and about which it is free to litigate. Epic does not need to breach its agreements or throw its own customers into this dispute to litigate an antitrust claim."

    The main legal challenge may (or may not) be less straightforward.
    edited August 2020 hlee1169aderutterkillroyuraharawatto_cobraFileMakerFellerDetnator
  • Reply 47 of 77
    slurpy said:
    To say they legally decimated Tim Sweeney would be an understatement. Jesus Christ.
    Starting at 2:15

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aIk3UWuWNo&app=desktop
    hammeroftruthmistergsfwatto_cobra
  • Reply 48 of 77
    killroykillroy Posts: 226member
    Apple_Bar said:
    Keep showing Epic TRUE colors! 

    What an #EpicFail...

    Yep the judge is going to have fun with this.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 49 of 77
    killroykillroy Posts: 226member
    larryjw said:
    Apple probably makes a reasonable amount from game developers.

    But, call me a puritanical old fart, but the idea of people spending their days playing and developing games instead of making a real contribution strikes me quite negatively.

    So, I'm predisposed to wanting to see Epic go under -- the less people waste their time the better. 

    Well Epic is not going under. Unreal engine is used in virtual video systems for broadcasting like CNN and sports coverage and film production.
    elijahg
  • Reply 50 of 77
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    I, for one, would like to have at least the option to side load an alternate app store on some of my iOS devices. Sure that would possibly compromise their security but I will just be playing games on them, so I am not sure it matters really. Keep trying to convince me that I don't know what I want. That's what Apple thinks.
    Well, I’d be happy for Apple to allow that if you’re prepared to agree that your compromised device is no longer covered by any guarantee (hardware or software), including AppleCare, and that it would no longer have access to any other Apple service. 

    That way, any malware you install cannot spread messages and ads for other malware when the malware you originally installed reduces the life of your battery, raids your address book and your document files, replaces apps on your phone with other compromised apps . . .
    edited August 2020 spock1234watto_cobraFileMakerFellerDetnator
  • Reply 51 of 77
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    No sympathy for Epic in this specific lawsuit, where they agreed to rules and then cry foul with no real evidence of foul play.

    Also, billionaires crying underdog about other billionaires is some weak sauce.

    But both sides have a point. The debate with me is in the subjectivity of 30%. What services Apple provides for any app costs pennies on the dollar (if that). There is room for legitimate discussion on what is fair for various apps and use cases. Even Apple knows this as they have discounts for certain apps.

    Someone reposted an excellent comment from ArsTechnica a few weeks ago, but there’s no way I’ll be able find it with the search facilities here. 

    It basically pointed out the every download from the App Store costs Apple money. That’s the actual download, not the app check, or the cost of processing the credit cards … the actual download. If you download an app for free, Apple swallows the cost, and the vast majority of the apps on the store are free, which is why Apple likes to make sure that companies pay their cut when they start charging through subscriptions or purchases. 

    Neil Cybart, one of the few Apple analysts who knows what he’s talking about, has long held the view that the App Store does not make a huge amount of money for Apple, if it makes any money at all, mainly because of the huge number of free apps it carries. The ArsTechnica post pointed out that Apple had probably paid out more than $200,000 in download costs on Fortnite alone, before seeing any return in subs. 

    Now if I could just find that post . . .
    hlee1169GG1watto_cobra
  • Reply 52 of 77
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    Beats said:
    lolliver said:
    kmarei said:
    ITGUYINSD said:
    qwerty52 said:
    This new fact confirms what there is behind Epic’s shouting and crying about Apple’s monopoly and about absence of freedom in AppStore.
    Money, money and ones again money!
    There really wasn’t any question about it. If Epic could have shown they have been damaged by paying Apple 30%, then they might have a point in this lawsuit. What they have shown is that Apple made them a lot of money and took care of the hosting, billing and bookkeeping for Fortnite for 30% of billions. 

    Those poor bastards. 
    Hosting?  Apple doesn't host the game servers.  They host the server where a tiny app lives that Apple forces Epic customer to download from.  That's it.  Once downloaded, Apple's job is done.  Why should Apple get 30% for "billing and bookkeeping" when Epic is perfectly capable of doing that itself if not for the fact that Apple forces them to go through Apple and pay 30%?  I wonder how many bookkeepers in the companies of the world get 30% of the companies revenue (not profit, but gross revenue)?  I'd venture a guess of practically NONE.

    To be fair, Epic should charge $1.99 for the app, and Apple gets 30% of that.  Then, all the IAP's are through Epic payment systems since Apple has nothing to do with that.  
    I was referring to hosting the App. Imagine how many times a day Fortnite was downloaded during the peak of popularity, plus whenever there is an update. That costs money and resources. 

    The reason why is they AGREED to it. The App Store was created for any developer to make an app. That’s why Apple takes care of those issues. So a mom and pop developer doesn’t spend a ton of money on hosting their app, processing their payments, and breaking down what taxes they need to submit. Just because Epic is big enough to do it itself doesn’t justify breaking the agreement. 

    Your handle implies that you work in IT, so if you do, let’s put it this way. 
    Some IT specialists get several hundreds an hour for their work. Sometimes, they only need to work less than an hour, but their agreement states they get paid a minimum of let’s say 3 hours. Is that fair? Well, yes, that’s what their employers agreed to. 
    People can download the game directly to their android phone from the fortnite servers with zero issue 


    Epic tried to avoid the Google Play store at first but realised it was limiting their sales. So yes, you can instal Fortnight directly without using the Play Store but it’s not without issue. 

    The difference is like selling a product out of your car on the side of the road versus getting it stocked at Walmart. 

    Paying only a 30% commission to have your app stocked In the 2 most popular app stores in the world seems like a great deal to me. 


    Epic previously boycotted the Play Store until they realized no one was side loading their game.
    And in its court submission, Apple helpfully explains why app stores are safer:


    edited August 2020 hlee1169GG1aderutterkillroyjahbladewatto_cobraFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 53 of 77
    kmarei said:
    ITGUYINSD said:
    qwerty52 said:
    This new fact confirms what there is behind Epic’s shouting and crying about Apple’s monopoly and about absence of freedom in AppStore.
    Money, money and ones again money!
    There really wasn’t any question about it. If Epic could have shown they have been damaged by paying Apple 30%, then they might have a point in this lawsuit. What they have shown is that Apple made them a lot of money and took care of the hosting, billing and bookkeeping for Fortnite for 30% of billions. 

    Those poor bastards. 
    Hosting?  Apple doesn't host the game servers.  They host the server where a tiny app lives that Apple forces Epic customer to download from.  That's it.  Once downloaded, Apple's job is done.  Why should Apple get 30% for "billing and bookkeeping" when Epic is perfectly capable of doing that itself if not for the fact that Apple forces them to go through Apple and pay 30%?  I wonder how many bookkeepers in the companies of the world get 30% of the companies revenue (not profit, but gross revenue)?  I'd venture a guess of practically NONE.

    To be fair, Epic should charge $1.99 for the app, and Apple gets 30% of that.  Then, all the IAP's are through Epic payment systems since Apple has nothing to do with that.  
    I was referring to hosting the App. Imagine how many times a day Fortnite was downloaded during the peak of popularity, plus whenever there is an update. That costs money and resources. 

    The reason why is they AGREED to it. The App Store was created for any developer to make an app. That’s why Apple takes care of those issues. So a mom and pop developer doesn’t spend a ton of money on hosting their app, processing their payments, and breaking down what taxes they need to submit. Just because Epic is big enough to do it itself doesn’t justify breaking the agreement. 

    Your handle implies that you work in IT, so if you do, let’s put it this way. 
    Some IT specialists get several hundreds an hour for their work. Sometimes, they only need to work less than an hour, but their agreement states they get paid a minimum of let’s say 3 hours. Is that fair? Well, yes, that’s what their employers agreed to. 
    People can download the game directly to their android phone from the fortnite servers with zero issue 
    so it’s not like fortnite couldn’t do this on their own, and it was Apple that provided this service for them.
    it’s not like Apple gave them all this exposure and made then the most popular game on the planet, they were huge before the iOS version came out.
    only reason it’s on App Store, is Apple forced them to, if they went to access iPhone users

    its exact like buying camera from amazon 
    and then amazon saying you HAVE to buy your memory cards from them
    and give them 30% markup


    They tried that, and had almost no success, they stayed out of the Google Play store and saw almost no traction ... So they finally agreed to GP store rules and sold instantly way more IAP, why? Trust, convenience, security etc .... Now they turn around to the people that offered them a platform to monetize their App in a more successful way than their own effort and bite them ... 
    aderutterspock1234watto_cobraFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 54 of 77
    9secondkox29secondkox2 Posts: 1,593member
    Comedy. 

    Epic thinks the popularity of Fortnite was going to give them leverage against Apple. And if that didn’t work, they’d employ jr. high bully tactics by gathering their friends, name-calling, and stealing. 

    But they forgot two things:

    1) they broke the contract that allows them to do business on Apple platforms. 

    2) Apple owns the freaking store. So they are the ones with ALL the leverage. 

    You don’t get to change someone else’s business model just because you don’t like it. 

    Now submit a version of the app that’s in compliance and enjoy the benefits of doing business properly - or don’t, lose millions, shut up, and learn how to be a good businessman. 

    Epic’s board should fire Tim. I mean the blatantly poor ethics and damaged business relationship with the biggest tech company on the planet. Not a way to steer the ship. Get rid of the maniac and get a real CEO. 
    aderutterkillroyspock1234pscooter63watto_cobraDetnator
  • Reply 55 of 77
    slurpy said:
    Just read the entire 34 pages. 

    To say they legally decimated Tim Sweeney would be an understatement. Jesus Christ.

    I feel extreme pity for anyone who actually reads the fundamental facts of this case and still takes Epic's side. What a pathetic charade. 
    You realize you are looking at a document drafted by people who’s job is to make you think that, right? By placing the facts in such a context you pick their side?

    Apple’s/Google’s pricing cartel is a bigger issue than Epic Games vs Apple.

    The latest issue is Apple shaking down WordPress, forcing it to add in-app purchases so Apple can collect its 30% extortion fee. 

    It’s like Apple is purposefully laying out a breadcrumb trail for antitrust investigators. It’s crazy.
    elijahg
  • Reply 56 of 77
    I, for one, would like to have at least the option to side load an alternate app store on some of my iOS devices. Sure that would possibly compromise their security but I will just be playing games on them, so I am not sure it matters really. Keep trying to convince me that I don't know what I want. That's what Apple thinks.
    If you are so adamant that you know that the apps you want to side load are safe then just jailbreak your device.  

    Apple’s walled garden isn’t something new, and based on all of the exploits that some foreign governments are using to gain access to a device is proof why Apple will never allow side loading. 

    You want security and privacy until it’s an inconvenience for you. You can’t have it both ways.

    Like others here have stated ad nauseam, the fact that other platforms where you can buy apps and games have similar agreements, but they are not under fire and that proves that Apple is being singled out to extort money under the guise to make things more “fair” between device manufacturers and developers. 


    If Apple’s iOS is so advanced and secure as they make it out to be, side-loaded apps can perfectly well run in a secure container and not go outside that digital sand box.

    In fact they already allow this “side-loading” in a way: for companies with an enterprise distribution profile.

    This is just about Apple’s fervent attempts to guard its cash cow. Nothing more, nothing less.



    elijahg
  • Reply 57 of 77
    Rayz2016 said:
    No sympathy for Epic in this specific lawsuit, where they agreed to rules and then cry foul with no real evidence of foul play.

    Also, billionaires crying underdog about other billionaires is some weak sauce.

    But both sides have a point. The debate with me is in the subjectivity of 30%. What services Apple provides for any app costs pennies on the dollar (if that). There is room for legitimate discussion on what is fair for various apps and use cases. Even Apple knows this as they have discounts for certain apps.

    Someone reposted an excellent comment from ArsTechnica a few weeks ago, but there’s no way I’ll be able find it with the search facilities here. 

    It basically pointed out the every download from the App Store costs Apple money. That’s the actual download, not the app check, or the cost of processing the credit cards … the actual download. If you download an app for free, Apple swallows the cost, and the vast majority of the apps on the store are free, which is why Apple likes to make sure that companies pay their cut when they start charging through subscriptions or purchases. 

    Neil Cybart, one of the few Apple analysts who knows what he’s talking about, has long held the view that the App Store does not make a huge amount of money for Apple, if it makes any money at all, mainly because of the huge number of free apps it carries. The ArsTechnica post pointed out that Apple had probably paid out more than $200,000 in download costs on Fortnite alone, before seeing any return in subs. 

    Now if I could just find that post . . .
    Nobody is saying that Apple should ask $0 for their efforts.
    Side-loading from other sources as well as the ability to run a competitive App Store would solve that issue, and Apple can still ask money for their API calls.
    elijahg
  • Reply 58 of 77
    tobiantobian Posts: 136member
    ITGUYINSD said:
    There really wasn’t any question about it. If Epic could have shown they have been damaged by paying Apple 30%, then they might have a point in this lawsuit. What they have shown is that Apple made them a lot of money and took care of the hosting, billing and bookkeeping for Fortnite for 30% of billions. 

    Those poor bastards. 
    Hosting?  Apple doesn't host the game servers.  They host the server where a tiny app lives that Apple forces Epic customer to download from.  That's it.  Once downloaded, Apple's job is done.  Why should Apple get 30% for "billing and bookkeeping" when Epic is perfectly capable of doing that itself if not for the fact that Apple forces them to go through Apple and pay 30%?  I wonder how many bookkeepers in the companies of the world get 30% of the companies revenue (not profit, but gross revenue)?  I'd venture a guess of practically NONE.

    To be fair, Epic should charge $1.99 for the app, and Apple gets 30% of that.  Then, all the IAP's are through Epic payment systems since Apple has nothing to do with that.  
    Hosting, billing, bla bla.. that’s a pittance! What truly costs Apple, I believe, is band of top code crunchers, who quickly gets to overlook the whole binary whether it doesn’t contain malicious code, which might threathen privacy, security, or device that runs it. They do quite promptly following the submit, each and every centesmial update. And it’s not entirely automatizable, this is costly mans work.
    spock1234watto_cobra
  • Reply 59 of 77
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 1,987member
    I take it unreal engine is going to be a hard sell for business reasons after this. 
    spock1234watto_cobraFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 60 of 77
    davidwdavidw Posts: 1,742member
    kmarei said:
    ITGUYINSD said:
    qwerty52 said:
    This new fact confirms what there is behind Epic’s shouting and crying about Apple’s monopoly and about absence of freedom in AppStore.
    Money, money and ones again money!
    There really wasn’t any question about it. If Epic could have shown they have been damaged by paying Apple 30%, then they might have a point in this lawsuit. What they have shown is that Apple made them a lot of money and took care of the hosting, billing and bookkeeping for Fortnite for 30% of billions. 

    Those poor bastards. 
    Hosting?  Apple doesn't host the game servers.  They host the server where a tiny app lives that Apple forces Epic customer to download from.  That's it.  Once downloaded, Apple's job is done.  Why should Apple get 30% for "billing and bookkeeping" when Epic is perfectly capable of doing that itself if not for the fact that Apple forces them to go through Apple and pay 30%?  I wonder how many bookkeepers in the companies of the world get 30% of the companies revenue (not profit, but gross revenue)?  I'd venture a guess of practically NONE.

    To be fair, Epic should charge $1.99 for the app, and Apple gets 30% of that.  Then, all the IAP's are through Epic payment systems since Apple has nothing to do with that.  
    I was referring to hosting the App. Imagine how many times a day Fortnite was downloaded during the peak of popularity, plus whenever there is an update. That costs money and resources. 

    The reason why is they AGREED to it. The App Store was created for any developer to make an app. That’s why Apple takes care of those issues. So a mom and pop developer doesn’t spend a ton of money on hosting their app, processing their payments, and breaking down what taxes they need to submit. Just because Epic is big enough to do it itself doesn’t justify breaking the agreement. 

    Your handle implies that you work in IT, so if you do, let’s put it this way. 
    Some IT specialists get several hundreds an hour for their work. Sometimes, they only need to work less than an hour, but their agreement states they get paid a minimum of let’s say 3 hours. Is that fair? Well, yes, that’s what their employers agreed to. 
    People can download the game directly to their android phone from the fortnite servers with zero issue 
    so it’s not like fortnite couldn’t do this on their own, and it was Apple that provided this service for them.
    it’s not like Apple gave them all this exposure and made then the most popular game on the planet, they were huge before the iOS version came out.
    only reason it’s on App Store, is Apple forced them to, if they went to access iPhone users

    its exact like buying camera from amazon 
    and then amazon saying you HAVE to buy your memory cards from them
    and give them 30% marku




     Fortnite is a free app and can be played for free on iOS and Android mobile devices. It cost Epic nothing for this. But can you play Fortnite on the Epic server using an iDevice, Android device, X-Box, Playstation and Switch, without Apple, Google, MS, Sony and Nintendo help? Who makes it possible for Epic to make money selling virtual goods for real money, to the Fortnite players on X-Boxes, PlayStations, Switches and mobile devices? 

    This has nothing to do with Fortnite being the most popular game on the Earth, it has to do with Epic wanting to make more money selling virtual goods, for real money, from their most popular game in the World and wanting to make sure Fortnite remains the most popular game in the World for as long as possible. You actually think Apple needs Fortnite in their App Store to justify their $2T valuation? 

    Fortnite became the most popular game in the World, even though Epic paid MS, Sony and Nintendo a 30% cut. 71% of Epic Fortnite players are on game consoles and the 30% cut they are still paying to MS, Sony and Nintendo, didn't stop them from becoming the World most popular game. If Epic had balked at paying MS, Sony and Nintendo a 30% cut, would they be the most popular game in the World today? Would they be making more money because they didn't have to payout a 30% cut? No one is forcing Epic to be in the Apple App Store or Play Store or any of the game console for that matter. 

    You're wrong, iOS and Android Fortnite players do not have to buy their v-Bucks from the App Store or Play Store. They can buy their v-Bucks online with a PC or Mac. Or buy a gift card from a retailer. However, when a mobile player buy or spend their v-Bucks, while playing Fortnite on iOS or Android, Apple and Google will take a 30% commission on their purchase cost and Epic will keep a 70% cut. A player can buy a 'cool" 2000 v-buck ($20 real dollars) virtual outfit on a PC or Mac, Epic would not have to pay the 30% cut and the player can wear it while playing for free on any platform. The other platforms do not get any of the 30% cut. But any V-Bucks purchased from any of the game consoles, stays with that game console. But the items they buy, moves with them no matter what platform they play on. 

    And remember, the players as the purchaser of virtual items in the Fortnite Store are not the one paying the 30% cut, Epic has to pay it. If a player buys 1000 v-Bucks (for $9.99 in real money) they still have 1000 v-Bucks to spend on virtual items in the Fortnite Store. It's Epic that pays the 30% cut for the privilege of accessing gamers that will convert real money to V-Bucks, in order to buy virtual items. And that is worth the 30% cut they pay.

    It's really no different than advertisers paying Google a premium, for targeted ads to Google's "customers". So all this BS about buying a car and having to buy gas from the car maker or buying a camera from Amazon and having to buy memory cards from Amazon is just that, BS. Epic is the one paying the 30% cut and they are not the buyer. They are the seller and if they want to sell virtual items for real money to iOS or Android players, they need to pay for that privilege. Just like the seller of the camera on Amazon pays Amazon a commission. And the going rate is a 30% cut. If Epic thinks their players are paying too much for virtual items with real money, they can lower the price of their virtual items or give more v-Bucks per real dollar. . By all account, they are doing just fine selling virtual items to the 88% of Fortnite players on the other platforms. Barnum was right.  



    firelockaderutterkillroyspock1234watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.