91–100 of 371 posts
Maybe the Apple cut is too high, but I don't think it's unreasonable for them to take some cut. They are providing the distribution platform to get your app to millions of users, it's not free for them to provide that service. They have their own server, bandwidth and employee costs too.
>Does a new payment method on mobile mean purchases there are less safe? >No. Thousands of apps on the App Store approved by Apple accept direct payments, including commonly used apps like Amazon, Grubhub, Nike SNKRS, Best Buy, DoorDash, Fandango, McDonalds, Uber, Lyft, and StubHub. We think all developers should be free to support direct payments in all apps. [0] All of these services provide something physical. You…
> Does this mean Epic will start allowing users of the Epic Games Store on PC to directly pay game developers and bypass the EGS cut? Are you asking whether Epic will start "allowing" people to buy PC games via direct purchase or steam or twitch or GOG the way they've been doing for decades?
This puts Apple in a very tough spot. Last week, Tim Cook was questioned in an antitrust hearing re: Apple's anticompetitive practices (along with Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and Sundar Pichai). The spotlight is already pointing right at them, so any move they make here is going to be noticed by lawmakers. If they remove Fortnite from the App Store, Apple will probably be seen as the bad guy. After all, Epic is not…
That is already allowed. It's a common misconception.
I love how they are "passing the savings down to us" from a non existing digital item that they set the price of. Ugh. Anyway, this should be absolutely fascinating to watch how the antitrust cases against the app stores go!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does provide value thats the thing, it's relatively easy to setup IAP and subscriptions, IMO they can keep the 30% but they should just allow apps to offer other payment methods.
> IMO they can keep the 30% but they should just allow apps to offer other payment methods. Would this just result in every app being free, but using (non-apple) IAP to gain access to any content beyond the opening screen?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair to Epic, they are/were offering developers a better deal than Steam. And they've done far more for gaming over the past decade than Valve, which hasn't been able to successfully innovate in the last two.
However, they're not offering ME a better deal. Let's see: - games aren't cheaper on the Epic store, in spite of the allegedly smaller cut the store is supposed to take - they're Windows only (and here comes the China reference, they only know about Windows in there) - their store still doesn't have a shopping cart (i may not be current on this)... reeks of incompetence? Can you trust them with your credit card info?…
They are literally handing out free games, Total War: Troy, a brand new game, its free today
>they're Windows only (and here comes the China reference, they only know about Windows in there)
Games will not have first class support for linux for years to come, this is not indicative of the linux platform, simply that the market is tiny and developer time is better spent on supporting platforms that are widely used.
>they have bribed developers to give them exclusivity, preventing me to get the games on the store of my choice.
Seems to be a pretty simple calculus to me. Epic is willing to pay developers and publishers to have exclusive access to their games. Steam takes a 30% cut, Epic takes 12%. I would take that deal in a heartbeat.
>btw the above means Steam but also GoG. You people calling out Steam for being a monopoly, how many titles have you bought on GoG?
plenty, they offer a useful service by providing older games with support for modern OS. They have their niche within the ecosystem but they are by and large not competing with Steam
>Epic's only meaningful contribution to gaming since Unreal II is... a free to play arena shooter? Is that even a game? I can't afford free to play games, sorry.
Besides Fortnite being an economic and cultural phenomenon, they are very generous with providing access to their Unreal Engine software, even cutting the cost of using it until they the developers are actually generating revenue.
>Does a new payment method on mobile mean purchases there are less safe? >No. Thousands of apps on the App Store approved by Apple accept direct payments, including commonly used apps like Amazon, Grubhub, Nike SNKRS, Best Buy, DoorDash, Fandango, McDonalds, Uber, Lyft, and StubHub. We think all developers should be free to support direct payments in all apps. [0] All of these services provide something physical. You…
Fandango does not provide physical goods. You can buy movies (not just tickets) on Fandango.
Maybe the Apple cut is too high, but I don't think it's unreasonable for them to take some cut. They are providing the distribution platform to get your app to millions of users, it's not free for them to provide that service. They have their own server, bandwidth and employee costs too.
The problem with Apple Pay is a) it is forced as the only option, and b) it is hidden from the user; you may never realize that all these years you have been paying for a service on your iPhone, you could have instead gone to the publisher's website and saved a lot of money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, another monopolist trying to fill their garden. Epic is literally buying the companies behind long established games, removing game support for alternative OSes, and eventually only allowing access from "the epic store". No matter who wins between Epic and Apple human people lose. They're both walled garden monopolists.
> Epic is literally buying the companies behind long established games, removing game support for alternative OSes, and eventually only allowing access from "the epic store". What are the examples where that happened? They rarely buy game companies. With Psyonix they are making Rocket League free to play and won't be able to download it on Steam, but will still be on a bunch of platforms.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that Epic is using the cheaper prices on consoles, where the platform owner is taking a 30% cut. Clearly Epic's pricing isn't actually driven by the app store costs on mobile platforms.
Epic doesn't pay Sony and MS 30% for console purchases, as both companies negotiate arrangements with big studios that lowers the rate.
Epic could still turn around and say "well, the price would be even lower if not for Sony and Microsoft," but I'm not sure how much they want to piss off the console manufacturers, who—all things considered—probably have more power as far as Epic is concerned.
The other elephant in the room, IMO, is that V-Bucks don't actually cost Epic anything. They're just bits, and Epic could set the price to whatever they want without much consequence.
More than anything else, I see Epic's stunt as a wake-up call. It doesn't quite stand up under scrutiny—but, once you've scrutinized the situation, you can also find better demonstrations of the problem, such as Spotify.