Open Menu
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
lotide
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
Login

Epic explains why it hasn't sued Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft over 30% fee

⁨168⁩ ⁨likes⁩

Submitted ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨Goronmon@lemmy.world⁩ to ⁨games@lemmy.world⁩

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/epic-explains-why-it-hasnt-sued-nintendo-sony-and-microsoft-over-30-fee-epic-vs-google

source

Comments

Sort:hotnewtop
  • raptir@lemdro.id ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    So if Google sold its phones at a loss then Epic would have no problem paying the fee? Sure.

    The more interesting part of the argument is saying that people will contact Microsoft/Nintendo/Sony for technical support with a game and expect them to help while Apple or Google would send you to the developer.

    source
    • ares35@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      google isn't the only company selling android phones.

      source
      • woelkchen@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        google isn’t the only company selling android phones.

        Other Android OEMs are allowed to ship whatever store they want in addition to Google Play. The Epic Games Store is on the Samsung Galaxy Store: galaxystore.samsung.com/…/com.epicgames.portal

        source
  • drmoose@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Honestly, they should sue Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. The fact that we allow such restricted computers that can land you in prison for manipulating them is just absurd.

    More realisticly Epic is just choosing their battles where they can see that they can make progress but they can’t say that.

    source
    • ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      They only need one big win. If they manage that, the rest would be much easier. As arguments will have been made and ruled. They can refer to the case against Google as precedent, making the subsequent court cases short, cheaper and/or not be necessary. If Google loses apple, Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo will all examine changing policy or settling any disagreements earlier.

      source
      • masterspace@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Precisely, it would be a stupid waste of money to launch simultaneous lawsuits against everyone.

        source
    • Shadywack@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I mean don’t get me wrong, it’s absurd how locked down their stuff is, but I’m not aware of prison time for opening up consoles yet. You can get sued, like Sony vs Hotz, and get ordered to pay some outrageous restitution, but that road ends in bankruptcy, not prison. Still complete bullshit that they can bankrupt a person, but there’s no prison…yet.

      source
  • HipsterTenZero@dormi.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    They’re trying to get John Fortnite into Smash and are trying to impress Nintendo by knocking Google and Apple off-screen, saved you a read.

    source
  • brsrklf@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Wow, this is complete bullshit.

    And I am saying that even though I have zero love for the mobile gaming market, while I do own and like consoles. There is just no reason to consider they’re doing things any differently on this matter.

    30% seems quite a lot, no matter the platform, especially for small indie studios. I’d care more about these than whatever the Fortnite machine has to pay.

    source
    • BorgDrone@lemmy.one ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      30% seems quite a lot, no matter the platform,

      I’ve been developing mobile apps since before the iPhone was a thing. I remember when the App Store was announced, including the 30% cut for Apple. There was a lot of excitement around the fact that developers could keep 70%.

      Before app stores, this is how you distributed and charged for a mobile app: customers would send a text message with a keyword to a so called shortcode, depending on country this was a 4 or 5 digit phone number. For example, you would send ‘NAMEOFGAME’ to 12345. The user would then get a text message back with a link to download the game. The message they got back was a so called reverse-billing SMS (also known as premium SMS). This message would be billed to the customer, at a certain rate that you as the sender of the SMS could configure. This basically meant customers paid for games through their phone bill.

      How this worked from the developer’s side:

      • You generally didn’t own the short code, it was shared with many users, you had to pay a monthly fee for the use of that keyword. Companies who owned a ‘nice’ shortcode (like e.g. 12345) would charge more for it than those who owned a more difficult to remember one. This would cost you at least €100 a month per keyword (the same as you pay for an app store account per year, for an unlimited number of apps)
      • For this amount all the operator did was forward the message to you, you had to have your own server to process the messages. Your server then had to call an API at the telco to send an premium SMS back with the link. (a so called WAP push message). The telco would usually keep 50% of the total cost to the customer. Send a €3.00 SMS , you get €1.50, the telco gets €1.50. For sending 140 bytes to a phone.
      • The link you sent pointed to your own server, where you had to host the files for the game for the user to download.

      Note that there was no store, no way for users to discover your game, so you had to advertise it as well. The telco’s took 50% for billing the customer, while you had to everything else. Of course the development tools for mobile apps were absolute shit as well.

      So when Apple announced that they would let you keep 70%, would take care of hosting, payments, would provide a nice user friendly app store where people could actually find your app and provide decent development tools for you to build apps in, that was a fucking huge win.

      source
      • mammut@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Were all phones this way? I was thinking on Windows CE phones you could just get paid via Paypal or similar and then send an installer file / unlock key.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
    • masterspace@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Honest question: how is it possibly “complete” bullshit, when we know for a fact that console makers are taking like a hundred dollar wash on every console sold whereas Apple and Google make substantial profit on every device sold?

      I mean I would love to see consoles forced to allow sideloading and alternate app stores too, but I can’t fathom how you cant see the difference in business models…

      source
      • brsrklf@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Someone linked to it already, but yeah, about that…

        Note that it was 1 year ago. So the hardware is probably less expensive now and the exceptions are at the very least not as marked.

        And of course, it was never true for the Switch to begin with.

        source
  • Grimy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    30% fees are insane. Those cost are passed down to us the consumer. We get shittier game because a third of the profit goes to these marketplaces.

    I get the epic hate bandwagon but what the fuck is up with the constant bootlicking? Google sucks for doing this and all the other platforms as well. They ALL employ monopolistic tactics to keep their moats, stop defending them because the algo tell you too.

    source
    • BigVault@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      30% fees are insane. Those cost are passed down to us the consumer. We get shittier game because a third of the profit goes to these marketplaces.

      Whilst that may be the case, every single day one launch on EGS and other stores (GOG, Microsoft, Steam) launch at exactly the same price on Epic despite the lesser cut. Not one single title I’ve seen launch at a lower price on EGS.

      I feel it’s naive to think that is, the consumer would ever benefit from a lesser cut, the fat shits at the top would just keep more.

      source
      • falsem@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        And they're hemorrhaging money

        source
      • ABCDE@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        They don’t set the prices.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
      • Grimy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        The consumer would benefit from a higher quality of games, since they would become more lucrative to make and the available budget after a successful title would be higher.

        There’s also the indie scene that would benefit from every dollar. A 30% middleman tax can affect a lot more than just the price.

        Cutting ceo pay is a good idea too but one problem doesn’t forgive another and regulating soft monopolies would be a first step in that direction anyways.

        source
    • darganon@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      The 30% covers storage, distribution, discovery, and probably more. If you had to implement that yourself you’d wind up with a shittier version for probably more money.

      source
      • masterspace@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        This is horseshit. Apple is making billions of dollars a year on the app store.

        Setting a CDN and a document search service take like 5min on Azure / AWS / GCP, and get you 90% of the way there, and your annual bill for them might push into the hundreds of thousands, but nothing close to approaching the amount of money that Google and apple are taking in through the app store.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
    • ObiWanGurobi@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I’ll happily pay these 30% if it means I get quality services for them:

      • high speed download servers
      • reliable cloud saves
      • automatic, non intrusive updates
      • discussion forums
      • easy mod management
      • friend networking, multiplayer services
      • responsive and uncomplicated support

      People always act like those are to be taken as granted, but if you have ever worked in dev/devops, you would know that there’s a lot of work maintaining each one of them.

      Also, you can use these services for as long as you want, despite paying for them with a single purchase.

      source
      • Rose@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Responsive support? On Steam?

        Apart from the forums, Epic offer all those things and take only 12%. Microsoft offer most of those things and also take 12%.

        source
        • -> View More Comments
    • AnonTwo@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Except even without the fees games generally get released at the same price

      You're just licking someone else's boot. Epic is by no means pro-consumer.

      source