Epic Games vs Apple in court face off INCLUDING Tim Sweeney , LIVE !!!

Ass of Can Whooping said:
Well that's on you. You bought the products and you were fully aware what you were getting into

You have your own responsbilities as a consumer. You can't blame everything on these companies
Click to expand...
People on this forum are fully aware.
Is Joe bloggs on the street? I doubt it.
In any case why shouldn't people have more choice, even within the Apple ecosystem?
 
WelshBluebird said:
People on this forum are fully aware.
Is Joe bloggs on the street? I doubt it.
In any case why shouldn't people have more choice, even within the Apple ecosystem?
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter if it's us or joe bloggs on the street. We all have an equal responsibility and being an idiot doesn't absolve anyone of that.

You have a choice

Companies should also have a choice on how they compete. Apple should be able to make their own exclusive products and applications to compete with Android which dominates the market
 
Last edited:
Don't like apple as a company, but I dislike Epic, and Sweeny even more(love UE tho). So while I've got no real horse in this race, I'm actually hoping Apple spanks this one
 
A.Romero said:
Epic can make their own smartphone platform and sell whatever they want without sharing it's revenue. Hell, they can partner up with a manufacturer and use AOSP as an OS and sell without sharing.

But no, Epic wants Apple's userbase and also want to skip paying. Fuck that. Apple's devices are their own and they are not blocking anyone from producing theirs. Hell, competitors use each other's parts all the time. They want a cut for selling on a platform that Apple created and still maintains. They have 0 obligation of letting other people sell their stuff.

Both developers and users knew Apple was going for this service model before developing for iOS and/or purchasing an iOS device and they decided to enter that agreement. If users don't like the restrictions there are many options in the market (they are just not Apple).

Also, Apple doesn't block Spotify from their store even if it's a competition for their Google Music video. You can still download Youtube from Appstore and Apple will get 0 from Google's revenue. They are protecting a very specific section of their business. Epic can sell through web but they want to offer the convenience of doing it within the same device. Why is that? Because they know the users won't bother going anywhere else. They need that impulse selling aspect for their game to be the massive success it is right now.

What's next? Forcing Netflix to let Disney sell their shit on their platform and not get a cut?
Click to expand...
When Microsoft can't make a 3rd platform stick, who can? A video game developer? Gimme a break. Consumers are gonna take one look at an "Epic Phone", ask if it runs their banking app, works with their Apple Watch, iTunes TV shows, if all the IAP purchases they bought carry over, etc. and get a bunch of "No"s in return. Then maybe some cheap people will pick it up on fire sale 6 months later.

The network effects are ridiculously strong. Saying "jUsT gO bUiLD yOuR oWn pLATfoRM" and thinking that'll actually work is like expecting next year to be the year of linux on the desktop. It's just not realistic.
 
LordCBH said:
I mean Apple has been pretty open that iOS is a walled garden since 2007 when it launched lol
Click to expand...
it launched as little more than a phone and eventually became a mobile computer with a gigantic sub economy rivalling, if not eclipsing the entire PC software industry. An iPod or a switch being a walled garden is very different than a computer.
 
salamanderjuice said:
When Microsoft can't make a 3rd platform stick, who can? A video game developer? Gimme a break. Consumers are gonna take one look at an "Epic Phone", ask if it runs their banking app, works with their Apple Watch, iTunes TV shows, if all the IAP purchases they bought carry over, etc. and get a bunch of "No"s in return. Then maybe some cheap people will pick it up on fire sale 6 months later.

The network effects are ridiculously strong. Saying "jUsT gO bUiLD yOuR oWn pLATfoRM" and thinking that'll actually work is like expecting next year to be the year of linux on the desktop. It's just not realistic.
Click to expand...

Imagine that... they might have to create and innovate their own market like Apple did.

But why do that when they can just sue and leech.
 
Last edited:
dem said:
Imagine that... they might have to create and innovate their own market like Apple did.

But why do that when they can just sue and leech.
Click to expand...

And nothing except microsofts poor decision making prevented them from making a successful mobile platform.
 
dem said:
Imagine that... they might have to create and innovate their own market like Apple did.
Click to expand...
And I'm saying it's too late. The players are already established. It would have to be an absolutely tremendous leapfrog to make a dent. Apple and Android just got established before everyone else did and now there's no room for a 3rd player. Unless Epic has a secret quantum powered smartphone with holodeck display stashed somewhere nobody is switching. Seriously go look at all the corpses of past smartphone OS makers. Palm, Microsoft, Amazon, Nokia, Blackberry. Could not make a dent even aggressively pricing devices, paying devs to make apps and giving OEMs free software.

Ass of Can Whooping said:
No they don't lol

They weren't even at 30% last year
Click to expand...
Worldwide they don't. In the US it's pretty much 50/50.
 
You can't be serious

Tesla should probably give up on automobiles.. it's too late to innovate


I dont know why apple even tried to take on blackberry. Anyone who's serious about work does it on a blackberry. iPhone is just a toy.
 
Last edited:
dem said:
Imagine that... they might have to create and innovate their own market like Apple did.

But why do that when they can just sue and leech.
Click to expand...
Yeah, why did the US government allow all those selfish telecom companies to leech on AT&T's infrastructure, they should have made their own national infrastructure and innovated like AT&T did when they invented the phone.
 
Curious piece of info from the Epic Apple case
Sony charges cross platform Devs when revenue share/Gameplay share falls below a certain threshold
46FWHxY.png
 
Spacefish said:
Yeah, why did the US government allow all those selfish telecom companies to leech on AT&T's infrastructure, they should have made their own national infrastructure and innovated like AT&T did when they invented the phone.
Click to expand...

There is a significant difference between telecarrier infrastructure and iOS.
 
I'm a fan of having alternative app stores on Apple devices. I don't like that Apple can delist apps I paid for and prevent them from running on my device. I paid $15 for Soul Calibur and Apple just decided that I can't have access to it any more. I still have the binary and even if I could install it I can't run it. They blamed Bamco for not updating it but it worked before Apple blacklisted it.

People should not be supporting Apple in their app monopoly. If you wouldn't support Microsoft in blocking you from buying games from Steam and forcing you to use the Microsoft store you should not support Apple in restricting where you can buy and install your apps from. It's long past time this monopoly was broken.
 
A.Romero said:
Epic can sell through web but they want to offer the convenience of doing it within the same device.
Click to expand...
Actually isn't this what the lawsuit is about? I thought they were required to sell credits through Apple and forward 30%. Didn't they try to sell through an account system off iOS and give a better price and they got smacked down by Apple. Apple is notorious for this kind of bullshit, same reason you can't buy kindle books through the Amazon app on iOS. I like apple products but in this situation I support Epic.
 
Ass of Can Whooping said:
No they don't lol

They weren't even at 30% last year
Click to expand...
its close to 60% in both epic and apples country of origin and 50% in the anglosphere, its over 65% in other first world nations like japan. When people argue about googles monopoly they aren't really concerned about the market share in Russia or china as relevant counter weights. Likewise we aren't really concerned about apples market share in third world and developing countries when discussing potential monopolies in the west.
LordCBH said:
There is a significant difference between telecarrier infrastructure and iOS.
Click to expand...
how? The amount of resources to successfully enter either market is astronomical. Apple is in the top 5 largest corporations in the world, they are sitting on an even greater sub economy than AT&T ever did.
 
Last edited:
salamanderjuice said:
When Microsoft can't make a 3rd platform stick, who can? A video game developer? Gimme a break. Consumers are gonna take one look at an "Epic Phone", ask if it runs their banking app, works with their Apple Watch, iTunes TV shows, if all the IAP purchases they bought carry over, etc. and get a bunch of "No"s in return. Then maybe some cheap people will pick it up on fire sale 6 months later.

The network effects are ridiculously strong. Saying "jUsT gO bUiLD yOuR oWn pLATfoRM" and thinking that'll actually work is like expecting next year to be the year of linux on the desktop. It's just not realistic.
Click to expand...
An epic phone would probably be android based... so it would do all those things out of the box. Banking app, check. iTunes TV shows via Apple TV+ on other devices or by virtue of MoviesAnywhere, check. Apple Watch? No, but it can work as a standalone device. IAP? Not in all cases, but in most cases mobile games are cross platform and the large, important apps are mostly free.
 
WelshBluebird said:
Is Joe bloggs on the street? I doubt it.
In any case why shouldn't people have more choice, even within the Apple ecosystem?
Click to expand...
People do have choice when they select their device. Apple is the only one that offers a 100% curated and secure ecosystem. Asking Apple to open it up so that Tim and his Chinese investors can have their own store is removing the option from people to buy into a curated and secure ecosystem.

I really hope Apple wins. If Epic wins we'll see all other platforms providers forced to do the same and the incentive of platform makers to continue sustaining platforms at a loss (to make returns on the closed ecosystem) will be gone.
 
Last edited:
dem said:
You can't be serious

Tesla should probably give up on automobiles.. it's too late to innovate


I dont know why apple even tried to take on blackberry. Anyone who's serious about work does it on a blackberry. iPhone is just a toy.
Click to expand...
Cars are very different from software platforms.

You can't just make a great phone. You need to have software people want to run too. You need stuff like Whatsapp, Kindle, Netflix, banks, etc. Stuff people want to use. Devs are lazy and cheap. They don't want to support more platforms than they have to. For example the Palm Pre had a ton of great ideas. Apple stole a bunch of them like cards for multitasking, gestures for getting around and using magnets to align the wireless charger. Did it years before Apple. Nobody cared because there was no software for it! Apple and Android already had all the apps and Palm couldn't catch up.

Smartphones pre-2007 were a tiny market mainly for business people and tech enthusiasts. It didn't get saturated yet. Now there is billions of iOS and Android devices, everyone and your grandma has a smartphone. Apple and Android captured mainly new smartphone users who were mainly consumers and didn't care about email but did want Facebook, a good web browser, games and fart apps. There isn't really an untapped smartphone market left.
 
WelshBluebird said:
It's more that it hampers your choice.
Say if Apple decide tomorrow that they are going to raise their subscription prices, or start charging a 50% app store fee instead of a 30% one (causing non Apple subscriptions via the store to become more expensive too). If you are into that ecosystem you basically have no comeback. If Apple were forced to allow third party app stores you'd have a decent option.
Click to expand...
84% of apps on the app store are free. The majority of those in the remaining 16% of apps now only lose 15% to Apple as long as those apps qualify as small businesses (most do with revenues under $1 million). The biggest, remaining paid apps are typically cross platform and have IAP that are cross platform. This last assertion is true of Fortnite and Spotify. Fortnite, after being removed from the App Store, saw commensurate increases in IAP and engagement on other platforms to make up for the loses in both attributes on iOS. This was factually proven today in court. Spotify - the largest music and podcast streaming application in the world - doesn't use Apple's IAP. They used to and only lose 15% to those remaining hold overs using Apple's IAP system, which has been disclosed as less than 1% of their customers. Apple's policies haven't hurt either from growing and they've benefited from those options. Sounds like they should just shut up and get along with the ToS they agreed to.

Apple isn't the largest phone manufacturer, and they aren't the largest OS. Yes, they are huge and wield influence. But so what. Being big doesn't automatically make them a monopoly or in violation of anti-trust.
 
Last edited:
WelshBluebird said:
You have it the wrong way round. Apple has the largest market share. Not Android.
Click to expand...

Not true in the slightest. https://www.mobileapps.com/blog/android-vs-ios-market-share

Apple has the most successful individual handsets and the most consistent hardware in terms of capabilities, but Android is dominant in users overall. Now many of those Android phones are cheap $50-$100 handsets for MVNOs, but still they have the install base advantage. How much this plays into app sales depends on what kind of app it is, business and productivity apps are far more successful on Android while games tend to be more 50/50 since only the better handsets can do much in that area.
 
WelshBluebird said:
Depends how far into the apple ecosystem you are doesn't it. That's why apple make nearly everything iOS only after all. It's only been a few weeks since the comments from apple about iMessage leaked for example.
Click to expand...
Jesus man. So should Epic sue Sony too? Because the PS5 only has the PS store.
 
Off topic but I remember many moons ago MS got done for having done for having their own product (Internet explorer) as the default and installed browser. I could never understand why.... It's their OS, surely they have the right to have the default apps they want on their own OS.

Why does the same not apply to Apple over its default browser on Mac OS and mobile devices, and heck even the appstore. Unless I completely misunderstood what the MS thing was about???
 
Anyone else just doing a mass replace of Epic with the name Tencent when reading any of the possible outcomes? I think I said it before here that the whole thing reeks of a proxy lawsuit for Tencent to see what online platforms they'll be able to try and shoehorn themselves into next.
 
boujeejamboree said:
An epic phone would probably be android based... so it would do all those things out of the box. Banking app, check. iTunes TV shows via Apple TV+ on other devices or by virtue of MoviesAnywhere, check. Apple Watch? No, but it can work as a standalone device. IAP? Not in all cases, but in most cases mobile games are cross platform and the large, important apps are mostly free.
Click to expand...
How well did the Amazon Fire Phone do? They did manage to carve out a niche in cheapo tablets, but fell flat on their face with phones.

Google Play is a must for every Android Phone outside China. It's not even as simple as asking devs to submit apps to a different store. There is a bunch of frameworks provided by Google that devs use like for Google Maps for example that aren't part of AOSP. Amazon had to clone them for FireOS.
 
wipeout364 said:
Actually isn't this what the lawsuit is about? I thought they were required to sell credits through Apple and forward 30%. Didn't they try to sell through an account system off iOS and give a better price and they got smacked down by Apple. Apple is notorious for this kind of bullshit, same reason you can't buy kindle books through the Amazon app on iOS. I like apple products but in this situation I support Epic.
Click to expand...
No, they charged through the same app.

Netflix and spotify are in iOS but you can only sub through the web.

salamanderjuice said:
When Microsoft can't make a 3rd platform stick, who can? A video game developer? Gimme a break. Consumers are gonna take one look at an "Epic Phone", ask if it runs their banking app, works with their Apple Watch, iTunes TV shows, if all the IAP purchases they bought carry over, etc. and get a bunch of "No"s in return. Then maybe some cheap people will pick it up on fire sale 6 months later.

The network effects are ridiculously strong. Saying "jUsT gO bUiLD yOuR oWn pLATfoRM" and thinking that'll actually work is like expecting next year to be the year of linux on the desktop. It's just not realistic.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Why should Apple give away what took many years skill and money to build?

That's why Epic shouldn't have just break their agreement and expect everything to be fine.

LordCBH said:
I mean Apple has been pretty open that iOS is a walled garden since 2007 when it launched lol
Click to expand...

I know, that's the answer I was expecting from the person complaining about closeness.

WelshBluebird said:
It's more that it hampers your choice.
Say if Apple decide tomorrow that they are going to raise their subscription prices, or start charging a 50% app store fee instead of a 30% one (causing non Apple subscriptions via the store to become more expensive too). If you are into that ecosystem you basically have no comeback. If Apple were forced to allow third party app stores you'd have a decent option.
Click to expand...

First of all: I wouldn't need an option because I don't do business with Apple. Precisely because there is a high risk of that happening. I'm at risk with Android but at least there are options with AOSP.

Epic knew how much Apple charged and they decided to build an userbase there. If they thought it was too much then skip that ecosystem because it is not very benevolent towards developers.
 
ethomaz said:
MS can created a closed platform if they wish.
Hey Xbox is a closed platform... they tried others not so successful too.

But any OS made for PC will be in a open platform.
Click to expand...

You didn't answer my question really. But at least you "sort of" admit that a PC is an "open platform."

Now why are mobile personal computers not "open platforms"?

Sorry, but no amount of weaseling answers will change reality on this one. Mobile devices are personal computers now and are the most important consumer product that anyone in society owns. You can destroy entire businesses by simply removing an app from either store. All of this power is in the hands of two of the largest corporations to ever exist and the business has no recourse to argue against these decisions. And they do happen.

Things change over time, as is this case with our mobile devices. What was once a luxury novelty is now practically required for day to day living. They have moved into a position of such wide reaching importance AND lack of choice that they absolutely need to be opened up, either by choice, or force of law if it comes to it. These are computing platforms and need to be on equal ground with Windows, MacOS, and Linux.
 
A.Romero said:
Epic knew how much Apple charged
Click to expand...

And also knew apples cut has been the standard in the industry for years. We're not talking that Apple wanted 15%, got popular as fuck, and then upped it to 30% because "lol we have millions of customers". That actually would be taking advantage of their position. But that's not the case here.
 
salamanderjuice said:
How well did the Amazon Fire Phone do? They did manage to carve out a niche in cheapo tablets, but fell flat on their face with phones.

Google Play is a must for every Android Phone outside China. It's not even as simple as asking devs to submit apps to a different store. There is a bunch of frameworks provided by Google that devs use like for Google Maps for example that aren't part of AOSP. Amazon had to clone them for FireOS.
Click to expand...
An Epic phone would likely come bundled with Google Play Store... just like Samsung comes bundled with it and their own store. I don't see where this is a smoking gun.
 
LordCBH said:
And also knew apples cut has been the standard in the industry for years. We're not talking that Apple wanted 15%, got popular as fuck, and then upped it to 30% because "lol we have millions of customers". That actually would be taking advantage of their position. But that's not the case here.
Click to expand...
Sanity at last.
 
I tuned in randomly a bit ago and heard Tim confirm that Fortnight has brought in 6b revenue through Playstation? Fucking unreal. 😲
 
A.Romero said:
Exactly. Why should Apple give away what took many years skill and money to build?

That's why Epic shouldn't have just break their agreement and expect everything to be fine.
Click to expand...
Why should Apple take 30% of everything Epic makes on iOS? They can make their own hit games. Apple needs the software developers just as much as the software developers need Apple. Just like nobody bought a Wii U because it had no games nobody would buy an iPhone with no software. It's a symbiotic relationship.

Epic wasn't expecting to be fine! They were looking for this fight.
 
salamanderjuice said:
Why should Apple take 30% of everything Epic makes on iOS? They can make their own hit games. Apple needs the software developers just as much as the software developers need Apple. Just like nobody bought a Wii U because it had no games nobody would buy an iPhone with no software. It's a symbiotic relationship.

Epic wasn't expecting to be fine! They were looking for this fight.
Click to expand...

Right.

If 30% is too much the market will tell them by abandoning the store. (Let's ignore that 30% is industry standard)

So why is this in court?
 
Epic should have sued Microsoft to force them to keep developing Windows Mobile.

By god they are owed a platform to pitch their wares…!
 
Last edited:
Gaz said:


Please try and defend this...
Click to expand...

That is the minimum you expect to share a bigger userbase without get any penny from the sales outside your store.

It doesn't need to be defended because it is fair.

Other profiting over you userbase without pay for it is really indefensible.
 
Dr Bass said:
You didn't answer my question really. But at least you "sort of" admit that a PC is an "open platform."

Now why are mobile personal computers not "open platforms"?

Sorry, but no amount of weaseling answers will change reality on this one. Mobile devices are personal computers now and are the most important consumer product that anyone in society owns. You can destroy entire businesses by simply removing an app from either store. All of this power is in the hands of two of the largest corporations to ever exist and the business has no recourse to argue against these decisions. And they do happen.

Things change over time, as is this case with our mobile devices. What was once a luxury novelty is now practically required for day to day living. They have moved into a position of such wide reaching importance AND lack of choice that they absolutely need to be opened up, either by choice, or force of law if it comes to it. These are computing platforms and need to be on equal ground with Windows, MacOS, and Linux.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what are you comparing here... mobile was never an open platform.

PC was created as an open platform... IBM created it that way... they created closed platforms too like AIX.
 
Last edited:
salamanderjuice said:
Why should Apple take 30% of everything Epic makes on iOS? They can make their own hit games. Apple needs the software developers just as much as the software developers need Apple. Just like nobody bought a Wii U because it had no games nobody would buy an iPhone with no software. It's a symbiotic relationship.

Epic wasn't expecting to be fine! They were looking for this fight.
Click to expand...

I bet Apple can do OK without Epic. They pulled the game from the platform no problem.

Will Apple miss that revenue? For sure. Bringing back Epic on the terms they want compensate for everyone and their mother trying to get a better deal from Apple in the future? Doubt it.

Apple should take 30% of what is published and sold on their ecosystem because they:

- Created it when there was nothing like it
- Built a huge userbase by investing in both hardware and software
- Maintain and update the whole ecosystem


Epic can go and build their store and decide what and how to charge whoever wants to use it. Apple can do the same. They are not changing terms. They are exactly the same they were 15 years ago.

Edit: I accidentally a word.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tim Sweeney on the future of video games...
22
696
mckmas8808 replied
[Verge] Epic says Fortnite is coming back to iOS in the US; Due to Epic v. Apple Court Ruling
8
324
Codes 208 replied
Big Tim Sweeney teasing big news for EGS today
42
760
DAHGAMING replied
Tim Sweeney says UE6 previews could be 2-3 years away
2 3
105
2K
SHAKEZ replied
Tim Sweeney: Solution to declining singleplayer game sales is getting it more socially and economically connected to interoperable metaverse ecosystem
2 3
100
948
Evil Calvin replied
Top Bottom