Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Epic direct payment on mobile

epicgames.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 371 posts

Re: Epic direct payment on mobile

#271

Post by jaegerpicker »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #254
legohead wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Apple's argument would be it's industry standard. Steam, Apple, Google all do this. Even the Epic store takes a cut, although much lower, but that's a case in Apple's favor (market competition).

Apple has, in fact, used that argument. However, it also defeated that argument in the hearing: It set the "standard" to begin with, everyone is following them . The entire point of competition is so that other players can choose to come in at a lower price, which is good for consumers. And if Apple prevents Epic from selling direct with a much lower processing fee (note the 20% price cut is similar to the 30%/12% di…

How in the world is Apple preventing Epic from doing anything besides not following the rules of the App Store? If Epic wants to sell at a lower price they are free to do so in their own app store. Apple does not have to allow anyone on their platform. They built it, they own it, and they have the right to set it's rules. If Apple was the only mobile phone OS available then sure there is a case but iOS isn't even the most popular OS.

Re: Epic direct payment on mobile

#272

Post by onli »

dfee wrote: post #241
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they won't. Facebook is in the Play Store on Android, and they used the Windows 10 Store up until they abandoned their desktop client. They want the largest user-base possible, which means they want finding and installing their app to be as frictionless as possible.

Here’s a link to the Onavo app from Facebook https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onavo#Privacy_concerns

No mention of sideloading in that link, instead it mentions a Play Store and an App Store listing. It's almost as if there is a lot of dangerous crap in those stores as well...

Re: Epic direct payment on mobile

#273

Post by gameswithgo »

dogma1138 wrote: post #203
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All Apple has to do to fix this is allow sideloading. They don't need to change the App Store's rules—they can make them more stringent, actually—and you can set up your child's phone to block non-App-Store installations. Heck, Epic would probably cave and accept the cost to keep Fortnite in the App Store; they tried to go around Google Play, and it seemingly didn't work out.

The main reason I use an iPhone is that it doesn’t allow side loading out side of development applications and has a curated closed store. I want an ecosystem that works and I can rely on including knowing that little to no one can side load a malicious application onto the device. I’m also very well aware of the fact that while Apple scalps developers it’s also the reason why my devices get security updates for 6 ye…

>I want an ecosystem that works and I can rely on

I've been on the Internet a long time and can't say that closed stores have led to any kind of quality of experience improvement for me. the apple store is full of misleading, garbage apps trying to exploit people.

Re: Epic direct payment on mobile

#274

Post by gameswithgo »

danudey wrote: post #240
aweb wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry but I'm not sure you understand how sideloading works on Android. You have to enable it explicitly for any app you want to sideload from (eg. your browser for a downloaded app, or an alternative app store like F-Droid). Afterwards, every app installation still needs to be manually approved and thus cannot be done hidden in the background. Seems pretty safe to me while still allowing more freedom to power users.

...and then a ton of apps decide "screw the app store, I'm going solo!" and people start enabling sideloading so they can try those apps, then sideloading becomes normalized and malware starts to spread without Apple having the ability to prevent it. Users who have issues with apps start hitting up Apple's support lines, and they start getting pissed off when Apple says "Sorry we can't help you, go talk to the develo…

> then sideloading becomes normalized

that is what I dearly hope for!

Re: Epic direct payment on mobile

#275

Post by spanhandler »

dageshi wrote: post #267
spanhandler wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's nice to have one part of my life where I don't have to figure out who to ask for a refund if things go sideways, wonder how much of a hassle that'll be, and don't even have to think about whether a transaction is reasonably safe. Do I want that to be my entire life? No. But I'm very, very happy not to have to wade through a shady bazaar to pay for commercial software on my phone and tablet. I've got enough stres…

You can have competition or you can have simple, you can't have both.

I benefit from competition between app providers in a variety of ways on the App Store, just not competition on payment methods. That competition is provided by Android—if that weren't around, and thriving, I'd worry a lot more about Apple's mandating a payment method on iOS. As it is, as a user, it's pretty much purely a benefit to me.

Re: Epic direct payment on mobile

#276

Post by strbean »

judge2020 wrote: post #237
Hokusai wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We should see phones replace credit card entry even for transactions started on desktops. The two banks I use already have this, as many other banks. I already have to trust my bank, they literally have my money. I pay my taxes and sign them thru my bank, I do transfers, I pay subscriptions, etc. everything with my bank signature. Apple is what is stopping more apps to use my bank signature to pay directly thru it.…

> Even malware, that should be way easier to detect and stop , way easier than to stop a pop-up asking for your credit card, pass thru their system Ah yes, one of the scarier trojans to hit your phone: click-jacking for ad fraud. > The apps communicate with a known command and control (C&C) server to simulate user interactions in order to fraudulently collect ad revenue. I'd download this malware any day over the act…

Cool. That doesn't in any way counter the arguments you replied to regarding asking kids for credit card info.

Re: Epic direct payment on mobile

#277

Post by u10 »

nottorp wrote: post #217
u10 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, you shouldn't take this so personal. Should I be calling Epic game store or Steam bad platforms if they don't support Windows 95? Unfortunately, you are not the target audience, and expecting developers/publishers to pony up the dev time and money to placate an incredibly small portion of the market is a fantasy. Maybe this will change in the future, who knows. I also take issue with you calling exclusive game…

> Unfortunately, you are not the target audience, and expecting developers/publishers to pony up the dev time and money to placate an incredibly small portion of the market is a fantasy. ... except both Steam and GoG can do it isn't it? :) > I also take issue with you calling exclusive games 'bribes'. They are looking out for their own self interest, and that includes not paying Steam a 30% cut on all of their sales.…

I don't believe you are willing to discuss anything in good faith if you are unwilling to read or begin to understand what I wrote.

1. As I have said, 99% of games do not provide linux first class support. A compatibility layer using existing libraries is not the same thing,

2. What you call bribing is actually competition. If you believe that there is criminal bribery going on, I'm sure the Feds would be more than happy to look at the evidence. Publishers and developers do not owe you anything, and I would rather they take the extra cut and either pay their employees/shareholders, or develop better games.

30% is unconscionable, and I cannot wait until the App Store is forced to be spun off or forced to lower their margin, and Steam is being out competed by Epic.

Re: Epic direct payment on mobile

#278

Post by gsich »

rurounijones wrote: post #186
fenomas wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Epic is explicitly a walled garden regarding the games it has paid to be exclusive That's not what walled garden means. PC game developers can sell their games any number of ways - if they choose one way instead of others that's up to them. For iOS there's no choice - either you sell through Apple or you don't support iOS. Hence "walled garden". In short: if you have to pay people to come into your garden, it's not…

aha, I think we are coming at the term "walled garden" from opposite ends. For a developer I agree with you, it is not a walled garden, they can sell games however they want, epic is one option who happen to be the only one that pays, out of all the stores, 3rd parties for exclusivity. For a customer it is a walled garden for those exclusive games in that I cannot play those games without having to install and sign-u…

There is no difference between Epic or any other game store in this regard. The PC is no monopoly and no walled garden.

Re: Epic direct payment on mobile

#279

Post by strbean »

buzzy_hacker wrote: post #152
owenwil wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wha? There are ways around this. Apple could just build sanctioned support for specific payment gateways (e.g Stripe/Adyen) and subject them to rules as a part of the app review process in the same way they are now. It doesn't need to be binary; it's just that they want to paint the picture as if it'll be a wild west of payments if they have to change that, even though they have the power to build safer alternatives.

That’d be an improvement over a monopoly, but still an oligopoly.

That presumes a small number of options. They could just support a large number of processors and we're all good.

Re: Epic direct payment on mobile

#280

Post by sushid »

tadzik_ wrote: post #136
qppo wrote: post #44

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.

> 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 Uhm, what? Epic has delivered Unreal Engine 4 – good for them. They've also released a successful battle royale, piggybacking off of other developers' success and rolled out a crappy store/launcher, a straight downgrade from every single competitor, that they actively force on people…

They've launched the Epic game store which cuts distribution fees significantly. How is that not beneficial to consumers?
Post reply on HN