Epic Games has declared war on Apple

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,480
3,977
126
Facebook decided to weigh in against Apple:

I wonder if this is going to turn into an epic battle royale amongst the heavyweights.
 

ultimatebob

Lifer
Jul 1, 2001
25,134
2,446
126
Facebook decided to weigh in against Apple:


Of course, Facebook's commentary on this subject is somewhat self-serving, as they tried (and failed) to release their own Facebook Games app.
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,480
3,977
126
I'm kind of mixed on everything, and that's mostly because I don't think there's a perfect answer/solution.
The perfect solution doesn't exist. But, going closer to typical royalties on just about every other industry would certainly make sense. Apple is basically tied with Saudi Aramco as the wealthiest company in the world while many App makers struggle. Apple does have expenses and does deserve to be paid. But a payment closer to 10% would put a lot more balance into the world, without monopolistic bullying.
 

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
53,024
5,905
126
This is a half truth at best. Yes, you use Apple's platform to distribute your app, but you don't have any other choice If you want to publish your app. You can't even side load apps, or use another app store.
If you want to put out a game on Xbox or Playstation, the only way you do that is by giving Microsoft or Sony a cut too. This is nothing new to software.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,285
13,582
146
If you want to put out a game on Xbox or Playstation, the only way you do that is by giving Microsoft or Sony a cut too. This is nothing new to software.
I mean, PC's have worked commission free for how many years? Don't lump us in with your vampire gaming companies :)
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,480
3,977
126
I mean, PC's have worked commission free for how many years? Don't lump us in with your vampire gaming companies :)
But, somehow it is okay for Facebook to be free on Windows but 30% of its online paid events must go to Apple if viewed on Apple phones. Seems logical.
 

Aikouka

Lifer
Nov 27, 2001
30,383
912
126
The perfect solution doesn't exist. But, going closer to typical royalties on just about every other industry would certainly make sense. Apple is basically tied with Saudi Aramco as the wealthiest company in the world while many App makers struggle. Apple does have expenses and does deserve to be paid. But a payment closer to 10% would put a lot more balance into the world, without monopolistic bullying.

For me, it's just figuring out that "proper amount" that would be the hard part.

It does bring up an interesting question though. So, in the world of patents, when a patent is imperative to a specific standard, it is often pushed for RAND/FRAND licensing of that patent. When a licensee believes that the rights-holder's fees are not fair or non-discriminatory, the rights-holder is open for litigation in regard to their behavior. What if we thought of the App Store as imperative for access to iDevices (since there is no other way to get onto devices) and consider that Apple's fee should be subject to a similar sort of scrutiny?
 

ultimatebob

Lifer
Jul 1, 2001
25,134
2,446
126
It looks like Apple is playing hardball, and is planning on kicking Epic out of the App Store and the Apple Developer program completely:


I'm wondering if Epic is going to blink first, or if this is going to become Exhibit A in an upcoming US vs. Apple Antitrust case about their monopoly over the App Store.
 

BudAshes

Lifer
Jul 20, 2003
13,935
3,229
146
It looks like Apple is playing hardball, and is planning on kicking Epic out of the App Store and the Apple Developer program completely:


I'm wondering if Epic is going to blink first, or if this is going to become Exhibit A in an upcoming US vs. Apple Antitrust case about their monopoly over the App Store.

If they didn't see this coming then they would have to be pretty stupid. But then again challenging Apple in court, when they have enough money to buy your company with cash and just dissolve it for no other reason than spite, may not be that smart period.
 

KeithP

Diamond Member
Jun 15, 2000
5,661
199
106
I'm wondering if Epic is going to blink first, or if this is going to become Exhibit A in an upcoming US vs. Apple Antitrust case about their monopoly over the App Store.

I am guessing yes if for no other reason that Apple has demonstrated in other legal battles that they don't have eyelids. ;)

And the antitrust case isn't just about having a monopoly. In the United States, having a monopoly is perfectly legal. This bit from Wired sums up…
Under current U.S. law, being a "monopoly" is not illegal; nor is trying to best one’s competitors through lower prices, better customer service, greater efficiency, or more rapid innovation. Consumers benefit when Apple disrupts the market with iPhones and iPads, even if this means RIM sells fewer BlackBerries or that Microsoft licenses fewer desktop operating systems. Antitrust law only springs into action against a monopoly when it destroys the ability of another company to enter the market and compete.

The key question, of course, is whether a particular monopoly is harming consumers – or merely harming its competitors for the benefit of those consumers.

The answer isn’t as simple as "big equals bad", or "competitor harm equals consumer harm." Instead, courts must rely on complex economic analysis to determine whether consumers, not just competitors, have suffered harm.

-KeithP
 

ultimatebob

Lifer
Jul 1, 2001
25,134
2,446
126
I'm not sure how the customer "benefits" from making them give Apple a 30% cut of every purchase from every iOS in-app transaction, and then having Apple preventing others from offering a smaller commission. Standard Oil would have killed (and probably did kill) to get that kind of power over a marketplace.
 

KMFJD

Lifer
Aug 11, 2005
30,031
45,270
136
I'm not sure if i can explain this correctly or not, i don't have an issue with Apple's initial cut of the app price, but any subsequent in game purchases ( be it in game cash, subscription, vanity item) apple expects their 30% cut is kind of where i draw a line?
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
96,952
16,210
126
I'm not sure if i can explain this correctly or not, i don't have an issue with Apple's initial cut of the app price, but any subsequent in game purchases ( be it in game cash, subscription, vanity item) apple expects their 30% cut is kind of where i draw a line?

a lot of apps are free, you only pay for in game micro-transaction so there is that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KMFJD

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,480
3,977
126
I'm not sure if i can explain this correctly or not, i don't have an issue with Apple's initial cut of the app price, but any subsequent in game purchases ( be it in game cash, subscription, vanity item) apple expects their 30% cut is kind of where i draw a line?
It is the equivalent of an auto manufacturer forcing you to buy gas only at their gas stations (for your safety of course they can't prove other gas will be safe and have no security problems on your credit card) and they tack on 30% more then you would otherwise pay. It just doesn't pass the sniff test.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KMFJD

Midwayman

Diamond Member
Jan 28, 2000
5,723
325
126
I'm not sure if i can explain this correctly or not, i don't have an issue with Apple's initial cut of the app price, but any subsequent in game purchases ( be it in game cash, subscription, vanity item) apple expects their 30% cut is kind of where i draw a line?

I tend to agree, but the logical conclusion of that and in-app pricing in general is that Apple would have to set a minimum price for apps so they get a cut for distribution. If they were a little more sane with IAP it wouldn't be such a big deal.

I sort of wonder if the end result is that Apple ends up allowing stores to be distributed by the app store. So Amazon makes an iOS app store and pulls prime video back to it. Anything from the amazon store would have whatever deal they setup for IAP, but now you could download prime video from them and rent directly from the app. I think the big cavet would be Apple would probably force some warning about device security every time you install an app from a non apple source. "Warning, this app has not be verified for malware by Apple. By installing this app you risk losing all data on your phone or damaging your hardware. Please enter your password to continue."
 

Mermaidman

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2003
7,987
93
91
It is the equivalent of an auto manufacturer forcing you to buy gas only at their gas stations (for your safety of course they can't prove other gas will be safe and have no security problems on your credit card) and they tack on 30% more then you would otherwise pay. It just doesn't pass the sniff test.
You don't have to buy a car from that auto manufacturer, just like you don't have to use Apple.
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,480
3,977
126
You don't have to buy a car from that auto manufacturer, just like you don't have to use Apple.
That is the key question of the lawsuit. Is there a single use case (there is not a viable alternative to do X, Y, or Z) or a single geographical area where you do have to use Apple? If so, then they have monopoly power.
 

ultimatebob

Lifer
Jul 1, 2001
25,134
2,446
126
You don't have to buy a car from that auto manufacturer, just like you don't have to use Apple.

Except that in this analogy, the only other auto manufacturer would be Google, and their gas pumps across the street are also set to keep 30% gas sale revenue for themselves as well. You're screwed either way.

Oh, and the gas pumps are configured so you can't go to a Google gas station to fill up an Apple car or vice versa.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
I'm not sure how the customer "benefits" from making them give Apple a 30% cut of every purchase from every iOS in-app transaction, and then having Apple preventing others from offering a smaller commission. Standard Oil would have killed (and probably did kill) to get that kind of power over a marketplace.

Is that kinda similar with Tesla ? Don't they have their own dedicated charger-type that isn't compatible with other electric cars?
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,480
3,977
126
I tend to agree, but the logical conclusion of that and in-app pricing in general is that Apple would have to set a minimum price for apps so they get a cut for distribution. If they were a little more sane with IAP it wouldn't be such a big deal.

I sort of wonder if the end result is that Apple ends up allowing stores to be distributed by the app store. So Amazon makes an iOS app store and pulls prime video back to it. Anything from the amazon store would have whatever deal they setup for IAP, but now you could download prime video from them and rent directly from the app. I think the big cavet would be Apple would probably force some warning about device security every time you install an app from a non apple source. "Warning, this app has not be verified for malware by Apple. By installing this app you risk losing all data on your phone or damaging your hardware. Please enter your password to continue."
If Apple wants to keep legally comparing their app store to retail stores (when saying that retail stores have a large markup), then how many retail stores give you most items for free hoping that you'll come back with in product add-ons? Not many. The freebees at retail stores tend to be tiny samples that you eat and are done with then have to buy the product if you want it. Apple can't have it both ways (we're like a retail store for markups but really we aren't like a retail store because we profit entirely differently).

Yes, allowing other stores onto their products would solve the problem. But, Apple has always been a closed system. For decades we've needed Apple-specific printers, Apple-specific disk formatting, Apple-specific software, Apple-specific apps, etc. Opening up the store to competition goes against the very heart of what it means to be Apple.
 

Midwayman

Diamond Member
Jan 28, 2000
5,723
325
126
Yes, allowing other stores onto their products would solve the problem. But, Apple has always been a closed system. For decades we've needed Apple-specific printers, Apple-specific disk formatting, Apple-specific software, Apple-specific apps, etc. Opening up the store to competition goes against the very heart of what it means to be Apple.

Sure, but if they do it, it wouldn't be by choice. I know last time I installed the amazon app store you really had to go looking for it. Apple will bury the choice as much as possible just like they make getting content onto their devices a PITA if you're not buying through their store.
 

KMFJD

Lifer
Aug 11, 2005
30,031
45,270
136
Sure, but if they do it, it wouldn't be by choice. I know last time I installed the amazon app store you really had to go looking for it. Apple will bury the choice as much as possible just like they make getting content onto their devices a PITA if you're not buying through their store.
kinda like this?

Z1cIIas.jpg

cxCXlkF.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Midwayman

Newbian

Lifer
Aug 24, 2008
24,768
864
126
I'm not sure if i can explain this correctly or not, i don't have an issue with Apple's initial cut of the app price, but any subsequent in game purchases ( be it in game cash, subscription, vanity item) apple expects their 30% cut is kind of where i draw a line?
The only issue is Epic does the same thing also from in game transactions on the games they sell so even if they somehow win this case then any game could refuse to allow epic to take money from them also and then you will see how long game stores like epic / steam can last.

Not to mention would the suit only apply to microtansactions in the games or would it also include the cut the stores take when they sell the game itself also?

If even either applies you can include consoles also as they lose money on the console itself but makes it up in game sales and without any such sales we would not have anything to play them on.
 

dasherHampton

Platinum Member
Jan 19, 2018
2,543
488
96
Anyone who thinks Apple hasn't been gaming this scenario for years and years is fooling themselves.

They won't lose.
 

KMFJD

Lifer
Aug 11, 2005
30,031
45,270
136
Facebook decided to weigh in against Apple:

I wonder if this is going to turn into an epic battle royale amongst the heavyweights.
Apple responded back?