> Epic should have sued over the size of Apple's cut, not it's right to take a cut
Epic charges 5% for Unreal Engine.
Apple offers developers significantly more than just a games engine.
Epic charges 5% for Unreal Engine.
Apple offers developers significantly more than just a games engine.
Looks like whoever developed iOS and all the hardware it runs on and the ecosystem that makes it appealing for rich users is actually providing Epic a ton of value and profit, but Epic doesn't want to pay for it. I wonder who's greedy here
(Also it's insane how we just accept that Epic with its massive profits and margins is the one who wants to get a discount from Apple, if anything they should be charged double what small business single person devs pay.)
Epic developed a cross-platform game that runs on half a dozen platforms. The appeal of the game is exactly because of that. And you claim that Epic should pay 30% to Apple, because "we are friends with rich people".
Not to mention that the "is actually providing Epic a ton of value and profit" claim is completely bollocks. Can you point to any iOS-exclusive games that matter out there? Ah, right. They don't exist. Because there's (comparatively) very little money in iOS gaming.
What?
> "is actually providing Epic a ton of value and profit" claim is completely bollocks
If it was true Epic wouldn't be clamouring so hard for App Store presence and iOS users. Epic is the first to admit that App Store provides a ton of value and profit. The whole rigamarole is Epic wanting it but paying less or nothing for it.
> there's (comparatively) very little money in iOS gaming.
According to whom? Epic filed a lawsuit because they were losing ungodly money after millions of iOS based gamers stopped playing Fortnite. What did they expect, users will start buy gaming consoles just for this? Sorry but that's ludicrous, there's plenty of other good games on iOS. Many of them also don't try to leech money off you or your kids like Fortnite.
> Can you point to any iOS-exclusive games that matter out there?
That's true of any big game, most games are released for multiple platforms because it'd be stupid not to do it if you can.
Do you see deliberately kicking themselves off of Apple platforms as "clamoring so hard"? On the contrary, Epic saw the platform was terrible for shooter games and driving extremely little value, and thus was happy to fight the monopoly on behalf of their _other_ main consumer - game engine developers.
> they were losing ungodly money after millions of iOS based gamers stopped playing Fortnite
Sorry but this is just laughable, and the numbers are all there in the lawsuit already. Almost no one played Fortnite on IOS. Some players installed on mobile but the majority solely used it as a web frontend to purchase cosmetics. Thus robbing Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo of their commissions for creating the platforms that players _actually_ play on.
> leech money off you or your kids like Fortnite.
If it wasn't obvious you have some weird bone to pick already, this certainly proves it. Epic's monetization model is wildly less predatory than the vast majority of mobile games. Why are you speaking so confidently about something you seem to know nothing about?
> [iOS] is actually providing Epic a ton of value and profit > Apple offers developers significantly more than just a games engine. (comment from threeseed)
Apple sells hardware to consumers (above cost), then blocks consumers from actually using the hardware they own, and developers from distributing software for it, without paying Apple a monopolistically-high cut of sales. All Apple provides to developers is access to consumers who are blocked from their own hardware, and a nominal file distribution via CDN. A game engine provides an order of magnitude more value to developers than a CDN file distribution platform offers.
If Apple was providing real value to developers they wouldn't be so deathly afraid of competing with other app distributors.
It was a miscalculation. They didn't realize that so many of their users play only on iOS and are not about to invest in new hardware.
Well, turns out their game wasn't that addictive by itself! what made it a killer is a combo of 1) a decent game I guess 2) being available on the most popular gaming platform in developed world. Simply look at HN headline, since 2020 the game made almost no news except for being kicked off marketplaces. Even during Covid lockdowns! It just speaks volumes.
> the numbers are all there in the lawsuit already. Almost no one played Fortnite on IOS
Exactly, they are in the lawsuit. Some 100+ millions of nobodies eh?;)
> Epic's monetization model is wildly less predatory than the vast majority of mobile games.
Oh yeah, I totally agree that scammy behavior is a continuum.
> Apple sells hardware to consumers (above cost)
You are expecting them to sell below cost? And then what, be a charity? Or sell your data to profit, like the alternatives?
> then blocks consumers from actually using the hardware they own
It's clear that you have a preexisting bone to pick with Apple. No one blocks me from using iPhone...
> All Apple provides to developers is access to consumers
The consumer base they created by daring to develop a completely new product with entire ecosystem of hardware and software that those consumers somehow keep and keep finding appealing.
It's $1000, most people have acess to that kind of money, even if they need to finance it and even if it is a terrible financial decision for them to buy one, many still do.
"Most people" don't. I maybe do but it's at least half of my monthly income after tax & rent
Worldwide, iPhone user = rich person (and also almost any American = rich person). By being on App Store, Epic had access to those users. Then they lost millions of users after Epic left App Store. You reap what you sow.
You don't need to be rich to have a payment plan of $40 a month for 3 years.