8 ms·

Fortnite on Android will bypass Google Play

66 points by e1ven 8y ago

tapoxi 8y ago
Oh boy, that's gonna be a lot of people enabling the installation of APKs from untrusted sources. I can't see this working well from a security perspective.
- dguido 8y ago
  Not entirely true! In order to play Fortnite, you're going to need an up to date phone with modern graphics hardware, and that means it will probably be running Android 8. On Android 8, "install unknown sources" is a per-app permission which means only the Epic Launcher will be able to install other apps. I think there is close to zero security risk to this strategy assuming the above.
  - tensor 8y ago
    I can see the scam email now: "New Fortnite Update! Please install the attached app. As before, you'll need to bypass security."
  - tedunangst 8y ago
    Are users capable of playing the game the only users who will attempt to install it? "Fortnite for Android 7" sounds like something users will jump through hoops to install given they've already read something about hoops and Android 8.
    - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
      And the other 28 rip offs on the appstore isn't going to help anything.
  - detaro 8y ago
    How do you install the Epic Launcher? Seems unlikely that Google will allow an app designed to work around their store rules in the Play store.
  - eghad 8y ago
    Most modern phones are not on 8. The Oreo install base is only 12.1%, most phones are still running Nougat (7.0 dominates with 21.2%, then 7.1) or Marshmellow (23.5%). Seeing as PUBG Mobile's lowest supported version is 5.0, it wouldn't be a stretch to assume Fornite could do the same. A lot of Android devices are about to have a real security flaw introduced (and normalized considering the median age of the Fortnite audience) which Epic is handwaving away.
    - dguido 8y ago
      Fortnite requires specialized graphics hardware only found in very, very few phones. It will not work on older devices.
      - eghad 8y ago
        No it doesn't. The requirements are Android 5.0, and can support something as weak as the Motorola E4 Plus[0]. And as someone who maintains a decently popular app on that platform, you'd be surprised how many former flagships (the Google Pixel in particular) still remain on Android 7.x (my wild guess is so that they can keep the old Google Now launcher) which does not have the selective permissions that come with Oreo. [0]https://www.androidauthority.com/fortnite-mobile-compatible-android-devices-888466/ https://www.androidauthority.com/fortnite-mobile-compatible-...
- ocdtrekkie 8y ago
  You're much more likely to find a fake Fortnite app by searching for "fortnite" on Google Play than going to fortnite.com where the only downloads are legitimate. "Untrusted sources" has always been a bit of a scare tactic to get people not to use Google's competitors, like Amazon.
seibelj 8y ago
Having only one app store allowed on a device is anti-competitive and is an area where I would approve regulators forcing changes. The fact that Apple has exclusive right to approve what I can install, and then extracts monopoly rent on top of depriving me of software, should be banned.
- dmitrygr 8y ago
  Android allows as many app stores on device as you'd like. Popular ones include f-droid and Amazon store. Both can be easily installed without rooting by simply downloading them from the web. Both provide app signing, updates, and authentication.
- hooluupog 8y ago
  You are allowed to install other app stores on a android device.You can even install apps from unknown sources.But you need to be responsible for your own security.
  - mtgx 8y ago
    However, you can't install other app stores from the Play Store itself. That seems pretty anti-competitive. Google also bans ad-blockers from its Play Store. Why? Because they interfere with its business model. Again, anti-competitive. No different than Verizon banning Skype from its network. It's a shame the EC didn't hit Google over these, too.
    - lern_too_spel 8y ago
      You can install ad blocking web browsers just fine. The rule is that you can't publish an app that interferes with another app.
    - uxp100 8y ago
      It's kinda a chain of trust. One of the value of the Play Store is that you trust it not to include malware (if you do). If they allowed other app stores to be installed through it, google can't be confident in saying if you use our store, you won't get malware.
rocky1138 8y ago
Is there not a FOSS store on Android that provides app signing and doesn't charge anything? This is an opportunity for Fortnite's creators to create their own store which then installs their app.
- stefan_ 8y ago
  Well the FOSS store is a FOSS store because it only has FOSS. They have an emphasis on reproducible builds so you know what you are getting. https://f-droid.org https://f-droid.org
  - rocky1138 8y ago
    Yeah this is great, thanks.
- s73v3r_ 8y ago
  Such a store would either require that the developer pay for payment processing and hosting themselves, or would have to charge in order to cover those costs.
- thinkythought 8y ago
  This is kind of what they did, "Epic Launcher" installs it and keeps it up to date. It seems to be something like steam/origin/etc but for android
pnloyd 8y ago
This probably will rub Google the wrong way.. I wonder how many millions they will lose out on because of this. Maybe they should introduce some special reduced fee teirs for the ultra high volume customers, as a precaution against this becoming a trend. On the other hand fortnight is probably the only app where it's users want it so bad they will be willing to do just about any procedure to get it on the phones. Everything else has competitors on the Play store.
- stefan_ 8y ago
  A precaution against this becoming a trend? There is no trend, there has been a massively huge tsunami wave and it's already passed through, and now the "Play Store" is a barren wasteland of utter crap loaded with ads and sending as much data as they managed to cajole you into agreeing for to a bunch of third parties. But every app is free! 30% was a lazy choice to begin with, and look at what it got them. It's not even the huge tax, the fact that your app will show up alongside a bunch of Fordnite and Fnortnite scams would be enough to scare me away.
- JTbane 8y ago
  Hopefully Google won't start disallowing the sideloading of apps- I could very much see them doing this given the recent European fines.
gonvaled 8y ago
what with ios?
- mcraiha 8y ago
  If you could have done this on iOS, would you have? Yes. https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-fortnite-on-android-doesnt-use-google-play-confirmed https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-fortn...
kjhughes 8y ago
In an interview [1], Tim Sweeney, Epic Games CEO, addressed why they opted to bypass Google Play: GamesBeat: Do you see a reason not to put it on Google Play right now? Is that something that would happen in the future? Sweeney: There are two reasons for what we’re doing. First, we want to have a direct relationship with our customers wherever we can. On open platforms like PC and Android, it’s possible for them to get the software direct from us. We can be in contact with them and not have a third-party distributor in between. The second motivation is the economics of the store ecosystem as it exists right now. There’s typically a 30/70 split, and from the 70 percent, the developer pays all the costs of developing the game, operating it, marketing it, acquiring users and everything else. For most developers that eats up the majority of their revenue. We’re trying to make our software available to users in as economically efficient a way as possible. That means distributing the software directly to them, taking payment through Mastercard, Visa, Paypal, and other options, and not having a store take 30 percent. If you look at it, the stores on the smartphone platforms actually do very little. They’ll put ads up in front of your game. When you search for Fortnite on iOS you’ll often get PUBG or Minecraft ads. Whoever bought that ad in front of us is the top result when searching for Fortnite. It’s just a bad experience. Why not just make the game available direct to users, instead of having the store get between us and our customers and inject all kinds of cruft like that? It’s a general criticism I have of the smartphone platforms right now. [1] https://venturebeat.com/2018/08/03/tim-sweeney-epics-ceo-on-fortnite-on-android-skipping-google-play-and-the-open-metaverse/view-all/ https://venturebeat.com/2018/08/03/tim-sweeney-epics-ceo-on-...
- dingaling 8y ago
  I wish more organisations just put an APK up on their website. Whatsapp does and it's a dawdle to set-up a relative's phone without having to bother with a Google account and Play Store etc
  - taurath 8y ago
    Does Whatsapp update within its own APK, or do you need to download future APKs?
  - fjsolwmv 8y ago
rconti 8y ago
God, I hate unnecessarily obscure headlines like this.
- dang 8y ago
  We changed it.
seanalltogether 8y ago
I feel like part of the 30% tax that app stores extract is based on how easy it is for users to simply buy what they want with money that's probably already in their account. Most of the money that I've spent on apple and google apps comes from gift cards. If I had fortnite on my android phone, and considered making an impulse buy, and was required to put in credit card info, I might reconsider the purchase.
ezoe 8y ago
This is how it should be. Monopolized software distribution platform is bad for so many reasons. And for anyone claiming that this is bad for security, blame Google and Apple who don't support the other way of secure software distribution and try to lock-in to their proprietary locked-in platform for the greed. Also, Don't use Android or iPhone in the first place because it's so restricted, unsecure, and cannot be trusted one bit.
- mikelward 8y ago
  It sounds like you're not familiar with Android. It was always possible, but it's easier since Oreo. https://developer.android.com/distribute/marketing-tools/alternative-distribution https://developer.android.com/distribute/marketing-tools/alt... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Android_app_stores https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Android_app_stores
Yhippa 8y ago
I've had to disinfect so many of my friends computers because they downloaded VLC media player from a website that looks darn close to something "official" but wasn't. Even with the one-time perms to allow this specific app to be installed from outside the GPS I can definitely see this being a headache for not only Google because of the high profile and popularity of this game but also Epic. Good luck to everyone involved.
guelo 8y ago
Google punished again for having a more open platform. With this and EU's lawsuit attacking Google for allowing other OEMs to sell Android with conditions, Google's incentive is to copy Apple and lock everything down and make it all proprietary.
- scarface74 8y ago
  That’s not what happened. Google was punished for not allowing manufacturers to sell separate products that were Android forks if they sold official Google versions of Android. On the scale of 1-10 of openness, that’s a -100.
econ4all 8y ago
Between this and their main rival reaching a trillion dollar valuation would someone explain to me what the EU fine was for?
- thrill 8y ago
  Not buttering the right toast.
- s73v3r_ 8y ago
  Anticompetitive behavior in forcing OEMs to bundle other Google Apps if they wanted access to the Play Store and Play Services, which has nothing to do with the other two things you mentioned.
  - econ4all 8y ago
    They weren't forcing anyone to sign the contracts, see Fire devices and the Chinese mobile market for google free Android examples. Also you're making sound like they were "bundling" trash, the apps are useful and of higher quality than most apps on the platform, not mention that they make Android phones comparable to iPhones.
    - s73v3r_ 8y ago
      "They weren't forcing anyone to sign the contracts" This is very, very disingenuous. If the only way to have a successful product in the American and European markets is to have the Play Store, then yes, there is some level of force there. "see Fire devices and the Chinese mobile market for google free Android examples." Google wasn't allowed in China to begin with, so that's a very poor comparison. And the Fire Android devices flopped pretty badly. "Also you're making sound like they were "bundling" trash, the apps are useful and of higher quality than most apps on the platform" Completely irrelevant; they're still forcing the bundling.
- superfrank 8y ago
  I am not a lawyer, but I believe anti-trust lawsuits often revolve around what the average consumer can do/is aware of. In Europe, Android dominates the smartphone OS market with ~75% market share and most come pre-bundled with Google software. With names like "messages", "photos", or "calendar" it's not really clear that these are Google products or that they can be changed. You basically end up with most of that market share using Google software without even understanding that they have a choice. I believe the logic behind the fine was very similar to the USA vs Microsoft anti trust suit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.#Judgment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor...). To put it in perspective though, the fine Google received was less than 2 weeks worth of revenue and will probably be lowered if they appeal. It's not really as big a deal as the media made it out to be. I'm not saying I agree with the fine, but I do understand how, in a certain light, the EU see Google's practice as a bit monopolistic.
ocdtrekkie 8y ago
Tim Sweeney has always been a very outspoken critic of app stores. He's famously rattled his saber about the Windows Store every chance he gets, despite the fact that outside Store installations will never realistically, ever go away. So an opposition to the Play Store on moral grounds is pretty much what I'd expect here from him. I'm guessing the 30% cut is just the cash incentive he needed to convince the rest of his team that this was the right way to go.
- MikusR 8y ago
  That would explay why his company has its own app store that until recently also was 70/30 split (now 88/12)
zelon88 8y ago
I support Epic Games's decision. 30% is insanity, and Google Play needs to face regulatory scrutiny from government.

66 points by e1ven 8y ago

Oh boy, that's gonna be a lot of people enabling the installation of APKs from untrusted sources. I can't see this working well from a security perspective.

dguido 8y ago
Not entirely true! In order to play Fortnite, you're going to need an up to date phone with modern graphics hardware, and that means it will probably be running Android 8. On Android 8, "install unknown sources" is a per-app permission which means only the Epic Launcher will be able to install other apps. I think there is close to zero security risk to this strategy assuming the above.
- tensor 8y ago
  I can see the scam email now: "New Fortnite Update! Please install the attached app. As before, you'll need to bypass security."
- tedunangst 8y ago
  Are users capable of playing the game the only users who will attempt to install it? "Fortnite for Android 7" sounds like something users will jump through hoops to install given they've already read something about hoops and Android 8.
  - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
    And the other 28 rip offs on the appstore isn't going to help anything.
- detaro 8y ago
  How do you install the Epic Launcher? Seems unlikely that Google will allow an app designed to work around their store rules in the Play store.
- eghad 8y ago
  Most modern phones are not on 8. The Oreo install base is only 12.1%, most phones are still running Nougat (7.0 dominates with 21.2%, then 7.1) or Marshmellow (23.5%). Seeing as PUBG Mobile's lowest supported version is 5.0, it wouldn't be a stretch to assume Fornite could do the same. A lot of Android devices are about to have a real security flaw introduced (and normalized considering the median age of the Fortnite audience) which Epic is handwaving away.
  - dguido 8y ago
    Fortnite requires specialized graphics hardware only found in very, very few phones. It will not work on older devices.
    - eghad 8y ago
      No it doesn't. The requirements are Android 5.0, and can support something as weak as the Motorola E4 Plus[0]. And as someone who maintains a decently popular app on that platform, you'd be surprised how many former flagships (the Google Pixel in particular) still remain on Android 7.x (my wild guess is so that they can keep the old Google Now launcher) which does not have the selective permissions that come with Oreo. [0]https://www.androidauthority.com/fortnite-mobile-compatible-android-devices-888466/ https://www.androidauthority.com/fortnite-mobile-compatible-...
ocdtrekkie 8y ago
You're much more likely to find a fake Fortnite app by searching for "fortnite" on Google Play than going to fortnite.com where the only downloads are legitimate. "Untrusted sources" has always been a bit of a scare tactic to get people not to use Google's competitors, like Amazon.

seibelj 8y ago

Having only one app store allowed on a device is anti-competitive and is an area where I would approve regulators forcing changes. The fact that Apple has exclusive right to approve what I can install, and then extracts monopoly rent on top of depriving me of software, should be banned.

dmitrygr 8y ago
Android allows as many app stores on device as you'd like. Popular ones include f-droid and Amazon store. Both can be easily installed without rooting by simply downloading them from the web. Both provide app signing, updates, and authentication.
hooluupog 8y ago
You are allowed to install other app stores on a android device.You can even install apps from unknown sources.But you need to be responsible for your own security.
- mtgx 8y ago
  However, you can't install other app stores from the Play Store itself. That seems pretty anti-competitive. Google also bans ad-blockers from its Play Store. Why? Because they interfere with its business model. Again, anti-competitive. No different than Verizon banning Skype from its network. It's a shame the EC didn't hit Google over these, too.
  - lern_too_spel 8y ago
    You can install ad blocking web browsers just fine. The rule is that you can't publish an app that interferes with another app.
  - uxp100 8y ago
    It's kinda a chain of trust. One of the value of the Play Store is that you trust it not to include malware (if you do). If they allowed other app stores to be installed through it, google can't be confident in saying if you use our store, you won't get malware.

rocky1138 8y ago

Is there not a FOSS store on Android that provides app signing and doesn't charge anything? This is an opportunity for Fortnite's creators to create their own store which then installs their app.

stefan_ 8y ago
Well the FOSS store is a FOSS store because it only has FOSS. They have an emphasis on reproducible builds so you know what you are getting. https://f-droid.org https://f-droid.org
- rocky1138 8y ago
  Yeah this is great, thanks.
s73v3r_ 8y ago
Such a store would either require that the developer pay for payment processing and hosting themselves, or would have to charge in order to cover those costs.
thinkythought 8y ago
This is kind of what they did, "Epic Launcher" installs it and keeps it up to date. It seems to be something like steam/origin/etc but for android

pnloyd 8y ago

This probably will rub Google the wrong way.. I wonder how many millions they will lose out on because of this. Maybe they should introduce some special reduced fee teirs for the ultra high volume customers, as a precaution against this becoming a trend. On the other hand fortnight is probably the only app where it's users want it so bad they will be willing to do just about any procedure to get it on the phones. Everything else has competitors on the Play store.

stefan_ 8y ago
A precaution against this becoming a trend? There is no trend, there has been a massively huge tsunami wave and it's already passed through, and now the "Play Store" is a barren wasteland of utter crap loaded with ads and sending as much data as they managed to cajole you into agreeing for to a bunch of third parties. But every app is free! 30% was a lazy choice to begin with, and look at what it got them. It's not even the huge tax, the fact that your app will show up alongside a bunch of Fordnite and Fnortnite scams would be enough to scare me away.
JTbane 8y ago
Hopefully Google won't start disallowing the sideloading of apps- I could very much see them doing this given the recent European fines.

gonvaled 8y ago

what with ios?

mcraiha 8y ago
If you could have done this on iOS, would you have? Yes. https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-fortnite-on-android-doesnt-use-google-play-confirmed https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-fortn...

kjhughes 8y ago

In an interview [1], Tim Sweeney, Epic Games CEO, addressed why they opted to bypass Google Play: GamesBeat: Do you see a reason not to put it on Google Play right now? Is that something that would happen in the future? Sweeney: There are two reasons for what we’re doing. First, we want to have a direct relationship with our customers wherever we can. On open platforms like PC and Android, it’s possible for them to get the software direct from us. We can be in contact with them and not have a third-party distributor in between. The second motivation is the economics of the store ecosystem as it exists right now. There’s typically a 30/70 split, and from the 70 percent, the developer pays all the costs of developing the game, operating it, marketing it, acquiring users and everything else. For most developers that eats up the majority of their revenue. We’re trying to make our software available to users in as economically efficient a way as possible. That means distributing the software directly to them, taking payment through Mastercard, Visa, Paypal, and other options, and not having a store take 30 percent. If you look at it, the stores on the smartphone platforms actually do very little. They’ll put ads up in front of your game. When you search for Fortnite on iOS you’ll often get PUBG or Minecraft ads. Whoever bought that ad in front of us is the top result when searching for Fortnite. It’s just a bad experience. Why not just make the game available direct to users, instead of having the store get between us and our customers and inject all kinds of cruft like that? It’s a general criticism I have of the smartphone platforms right now. [1] https://venturebeat.com/2018/08/03/tim-sweeney-epics-ceo-on-fortnite-on-android-skipping-google-play-and-the-open-metaverse/view-all/ https://venturebeat.com/2018/08/03/tim-sweeney-epics-ceo-on-...

dingaling 8y ago
I wish more organisations just put an APK up on their website. Whatsapp does and it's a dawdle to set-up a relative's phone without having to bother with a Google account and Play Store etc
- taurath 8y ago
  Does Whatsapp update within its own APK, or do you need to download future APKs?
- fjsolwmv 8y ago

rconti 8y ago

God, I hate unnecessarily obscure headlines like this.

dang 8y ago
We changed it.

seanalltogether 8y ago

I feel like part of the 30% tax that app stores extract is based on how easy it is for users to simply buy what they want with money that's probably already in their account. Most of the money that I've spent on apple and google apps comes from gift cards. If I had fortnite on my android phone, and considered making an impulse buy, and was required to put in credit card info, I might reconsider the purchase.

ezoe 8y ago

This is how it should be. Monopolized software distribution platform is bad for so many reasons. And for anyone claiming that this is bad for security, blame Google and Apple who don't support the other way of secure software distribution and try to lock-in to their proprietary locked-in platform for the greed. Also, Don't use Android or iPhone in the first place because it's so restricted, unsecure, and cannot be trusted one bit.

mikelward 8y ago
It sounds like you're not familiar with Android. It was always possible, but it's easier since Oreo. https://developer.android.com/distribute/marketing-tools/alternative-distribution https://developer.android.com/distribute/marketing-tools/alt... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Android_app_stores https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Android_app_stores

Yhippa 8y ago

I've had to disinfect so many of my friends computers because they downloaded VLC media player from a website that looks darn close to something "official" but wasn't. Even with the one-time perms to allow this specific app to be installed from outside the GPS I can definitely see this being a headache for not only Google because of the high profile and popularity of this game but also Epic. Good luck to everyone involved.

guelo 8y ago

Google punished again for having a more open platform. With this and EU's lawsuit attacking Google for allowing other OEMs to sell Android with conditions, Google's incentive is to copy Apple and lock everything down and make it all proprietary.

scarface74 8y ago
That’s not what happened. Google was punished for not allowing manufacturers to sell separate products that were Android forks if they sold official Google versions of Android. On the scale of 1-10 of openness, that’s a -100.

econ4all 8y ago

Between this and their main rival reaching a trillion dollar valuation would someone explain to me what the EU fine was for?

thrill 8y ago
Not buttering the right toast.
s73v3r_ 8y ago
Anticompetitive behavior in forcing OEMs to bundle other Google Apps if they wanted access to the Play Store and Play Services, which has nothing to do with the other two things you mentioned.
- econ4all 8y ago
  They weren't forcing anyone to sign the contracts, see Fire devices and the Chinese mobile market for google free Android examples. Also you're making sound like they were "bundling" trash, the apps are useful and of higher quality than most apps on the platform, not mention that they make Android phones comparable to iPhones.
  - s73v3r_ 8y ago
    "They weren't forcing anyone to sign the contracts" This is very, very disingenuous. If the only way to have a successful product in the American and European markets is to have the Play Store, then yes, there is some level of force there. "see Fire devices and the Chinese mobile market for google free Android examples." Google wasn't allowed in China to begin with, so that's a very poor comparison. And the Fire Android devices flopped pretty badly. "Also you're making sound like they were "bundling" trash, the apps are useful and of higher quality than most apps on the platform" Completely irrelevant; they're still forcing the bundling.
superfrank 8y ago
I am not a lawyer, but I believe anti-trust lawsuits often revolve around what the average consumer can do/is aware of. In Europe, Android dominates the smartphone OS market with ~75% market share and most come pre-bundled with Google software. With names like "messages", "photos", or "calendar" it's not really clear that these are Google products or that they can be changed. You basically end up with most of that market share using Google software without even understanding that they have a choice. I believe the logic behind the fine was very similar to the USA vs Microsoft anti trust suit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.#Judgment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor...). To put it in perspective though, the fine Google received was less than 2 weeks worth of revenue and will probably be lowered if they appeal. It's not really as big a deal as the media made it out to be. I'm not saying I agree with the fine, but I do understand how, in a certain light, the EU see Google's practice as a bit monopolistic.

ocdtrekkie 8y ago

Tim Sweeney has always been a very outspoken critic of app stores. He's famously rattled his saber about the Windows Store every chance he gets, despite the fact that outside Store installations will never realistically, ever go away. So an opposition to the Play Store on moral grounds is pretty much what I'd expect here from him. I'm guessing the 30% cut is just the cash incentive he needed to convince the rest of his team that this was the right way to go.

MikusR 8y ago
That would explay why his company has its own app store that until recently also was 70/30 split (now 88/12)

zelon88 8y ago

I support Epic Games's decision. 30% is insanity, and Google Play needs to face regulatory scrutiny from government.