6 ms·

> I'd also like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that it is not possible to publish an application on the Apple App Store without paying. Period end.

> I'd also like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that it is not possible to publish an application on the Apple App Store without paying. Period end. I'd also like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that the same is true for games on the Xbox, PlayStation and nearly every mainstream games console for the past thirty years. Pretty much every games console software title included a healthy cut for Nintendo, Sega, Microsoft, or Sony. And if you didn't have the explicit blessing of these companies, you couldn't publish your games at all. Period end. Where was your outrage then?

Hamuko 6y ago
>Where was your outrage then? Where was the game publishers' outrage? Where was the game developers' outrage? Gaming console makers and game developers have way better relations than Apple and the people developing for the App Store. And the game console makers' cut isn't just pure greed. Sony took an estimate loss of $240-$300 on every PS3 sold at launch just in order to widen out the install base.
- Apocryphon 6y ago
  Microsoft lost money for each Xbox they sold for multiple generations of Xboxes.
- sjwright 6y ago
  > Where was the game publishers' outrage? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_v._Accolade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_v._Accolade > Gaming console makers and game developers have way better relations Let's set aside the unproven assumptions; so your logic is that if you're a nice platform monopolist, you can charge arbitrary platform access fees. But if you're a bunch of meanies, different laws shall apply to you. I'm sorry, I was under the misapprehension that you were making a serious point. > Sony took an estimate loss of $240-$300 on every PS3 Now I know you're not being serious. Such behaviours are anti-competitive as it would be exceedingly difficult for a new market entrant to compete with such artificially low console prices. What you're saying is that the US Government should enact laws which favour dumping and loss-leader activity. Ridiculous.
  - Apocryphon 6y ago
    > Let's set aside the unproven assumptions; so your logic is that if you're a nice platform monopolist, you can charge arbitrary platform access fees. But if you're a bunch of meanies, different laws shall apply to you. I'm sorry, I was under the misapprehension that you were making a serious point. You're not entirely wrong: https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10/07/report-steams-30-cut-is-actually-the-industry-standard https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10/07/report-steams-30-cut... > One source explained that although Steam only takes 30%, other fees and deductions mean they are usually collecting closer to 65% on their end, while they say console sales return much closer to the full 70% but are stingier with refunds and the like. > Another source also stressed that just because a retailer takes 30% doesn’t mean the developer of the game actually gets the other 70%, saying publishers often earn between 30-70% of a sale themselves depending on the deal that has been struck. There are also engine licensing fees to consider (games that use Unreal have its 5% fee waived if they are sold on the Epic Store), taxes, and other costs not factored into what many people assume the actual creator of a game earns. One source said their takeaway from a physical retailer at the end of the day is often between just 10-15%. You know, maybe this doesn't have to end with Apple. The Google Play store charges a 30% service fee as well. Maybe the entire pricing system of the industry is fucked, and worth further scrutiny. Furthermore, it's been repeatedly brought up in the discourse over the publishing industry's recent lawsuit against Internet Archive that the industry standard for book publishing are contracts where the publishers pocket 75% of book sales, while the author retain the rest. Meanwhile, you hear horror stories out of the music industry where artists are paid a pittance. This can be an endemic problem that's afflicting multiple industries at once. Maybe we can confer our righteous indignation both at Apple, and the rest. And maybe we ought to figure out a better way to help creators, whether app developers, game developers, authors, or musicians, get the pay they're due.
    - sjwright 6y ago
      FWIW, I completely agree with everything you wrote. I'm not opposed to new laws that set a limit on platform access fees—but such laws can't be targeted at Apple exclusively. They have to be applied to any company which charges fees for access to an exclusive market.
- odshoifsdhfs 6y ago
  Actually, game developers were pissed are xbox live (I think, when they finally started to allow 'Indies') I was one and remember talking with publishers that weren't too happy about it, the long contracts and jumping around to meet their guidelines. Also, if Sony took a loss on the PS3 to get a wider base isn't that dumping?
lukeramsden 6y ago
Video game consoles are not comparable to smartphones, smartphones are an integral part of (Western) life, communication, co-ordination - a video game console is purely entertainment.
- sjwright 6y ago
  That may be true in practice, but it's not something you can create laws around. The US Government shouldn't be in the business of deciding which consumer electronics are integral to (Western) life. Particularly given that the vast majority of App Store profits are going to the makers of games. If there are going to be mandated limits, they should apply to all companies which build hardware and charge platform access fees to software developers.
  - Hamuko 6y ago
    >That may be true in practice, but it's not something you can create laws around. The US Government shouldn't be in the business of deciding which consumer electronics are integral to (Western) life. Why not?
    - sjwright 6y ago
      Because they're not good at it and are guaranteed to screw it up somehow and especially at the margins. Do these new rules include the Android Play Store? Does it include the Apple TV app store? Does it include the Play Store when purchased on a television running Android? Imagine if Mattel creates a new ultra-low cost video games console; should these rules apply to them? What if their console happens to run Android? What if their games console runs Android and the Play Store? What if apps bought on their game store can also run on a phone? Ultimately it ends up just warping the market and adding yet more complexity into business—and complexity benefits powerful established players over new entrants.
      - Hamuko 6y ago
        >Because they're not good at it and are guaranteed to screw it up somehow and especially at the margins. Is this a proven or unproven assumption?
brmgb 6y ago
> Where was your outrage then? There has been plenty of that in the last few years, especially regarding Steam fees. Large game producers complain a bit less because their IP is so valuable they can get deal. Also, I don't understand why Apple apologists think the console market is a good defense of Apple behavior. Every time someone talks about it, all I can hear is it's high time to make a precedent because the situation is also terrible in this other related market.
greggman3 6y ago
First off I've always been outraged by those things but, secondly There's a big different between a device used almost entirely or gaming and a device through which almost all personal communication, news, banking, payments, e-money, travel plans, plane and train tickets, medical services, political planning, etc. happen. A smartphone has pretty much become essential for life. A game console has never been that.

Hamuko 6y ago

>Where was your outrage then? Where was the game publishers' outrage? Where was the game developers' outrage? Gaming console makers and game developers have way better relations than Apple and the people developing for the App Store. And the game console makers' cut isn't just pure greed. Sony took an estimate loss of $240-$300 on every PS3 sold at launch just in order to widen out the install base.

Apocryphon 6y ago
Microsoft lost money for each Xbox they sold for multiple generations of Xboxes.
sjwright 6y ago
> Where was the game publishers' outrage? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_v._Accolade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_v._Accolade > Gaming console makers and game developers have way better relations Let's set aside the unproven assumptions; so your logic is that if you're a nice platform monopolist, you can charge arbitrary platform access fees. But if you're a bunch of meanies, different laws shall apply to you. I'm sorry, I was under the misapprehension that you were making a serious point. > Sony took an estimate loss of $240-$300 on every PS3 Now I know you're not being serious. Such behaviours are anti-competitive as it would be exceedingly difficult for a new market entrant to compete with such artificially low console prices. What you're saying is that the US Government should enact laws which favour dumping and loss-leader activity. Ridiculous.
- Apocryphon 6y ago
  > Let's set aside the unproven assumptions; so your logic is that if you're a nice platform monopolist, you can charge arbitrary platform access fees. But if you're a bunch of meanies, different laws shall apply to you. I'm sorry, I was under the misapprehension that you were making a serious point. You're not entirely wrong: https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10/07/report-steams-30-cut-is-actually-the-industry-standard https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10/07/report-steams-30-cut... > One source explained that although Steam only takes 30%, other fees and deductions mean they are usually collecting closer to 65% on their end, while they say console sales return much closer to the full 70% but are stingier with refunds and the like. > Another source also stressed that just because a retailer takes 30% doesn’t mean the developer of the game actually gets the other 70%, saying publishers often earn between 30-70% of a sale themselves depending on the deal that has been struck. There are also engine licensing fees to consider (games that use Unreal have its 5% fee waived if they are sold on the Epic Store), taxes, and other costs not factored into what many people assume the actual creator of a game earns. One source said their takeaway from a physical retailer at the end of the day is often between just 10-15%. You know, maybe this doesn't have to end with Apple. The Google Play store charges a 30% service fee as well. Maybe the entire pricing system of the industry is fucked, and worth further scrutiny. Furthermore, it's been repeatedly brought up in the discourse over the publishing industry's recent lawsuit against Internet Archive that the industry standard for book publishing are contracts where the publishers pocket 75% of book sales, while the author retain the rest. Meanwhile, you hear horror stories out of the music industry where artists are paid a pittance. This can be an endemic problem that's afflicting multiple industries at once. Maybe we can confer our righteous indignation both at Apple, and the rest. And maybe we ought to figure out a better way to help creators, whether app developers, game developers, authors, or musicians, get the pay they're due.
  - sjwright 6y ago
    FWIW, I completely agree with everything you wrote. I'm not opposed to new laws that set a limit on platform access fees—but such laws can't be targeted at Apple exclusively. They have to be applied to any company which charges fees for access to an exclusive market.
odshoifsdhfs 6y ago
Actually, game developers were pissed are xbox live (I think, when they finally started to allow 'Indies') I was one and remember talking with publishers that weren't too happy about it, the long contracts and jumping around to meet their guidelines. Also, if Sony took a loss on the PS3 to get a wider base isn't that dumping?

lukeramsden 6y ago

Video game consoles are not comparable to smartphones, smartphones are an integral part of (Western) life, communication, co-ordination - a video game console is purely entertainment.

sjwright 6y ago
That may be true in practice, but it's not something you can create laws around. The US Government shouldn't be in the business of deciding which consumer electronics are integral to (Western) life. Particularly given that the vast majority of App Store profits are going to the makers of games. If there are going to be mandated limits, they should apply to all companies which build hardware and charge platform access fees to software developers.
- Hamuko 6y ago
  >That may be true in practice, but it's not something you can create laws around. The US Government shouldn't be in the business of deciding which consumer electronics are integral to (Western) life. Why not?
  - sjwright 6y ago
    Because they're not good at it and are guaranteed to screw it up somehow and especially at the margins. Do these new rules include the Android Play Store? Does it include the Apple TV app store? Does it include the Play Store when purchased on a television running Android? Imagine if Mattel creates a new ultra-low cost video games console; should these rules apply to them? What if their console happens to run Android? What if their games console runs Android and the Play Store? What if apps bought on their game store can also run on a phone? Ultimately it ends up just warping the market and adding yet more complexity into business—and complexity benefits powerful established players over new entrants.
    - Hamuko 6y ago
      >Because they're not good at it and are guaranteed to screw it up somehow and especially at the margins. Is this a proven or unproven assumption?

brmgb 6y ago

> Where was your outrage then? There has been plenty of that in the last few years, especially regarding Steam fees. Large game producers complain a bit less because their IP is so valuable they can get deal. Also, I don't understand why Apple apologists think the console market is a good defense of Apple behavior. Every time someone talks about it, all I can hear is it's high time to make a precedent because the situation is also terrible in this other related market.

greggman3 6y ago

First off I've always been outraged by those things but, secondly There's a big different between a device used almost entirely or gaming and a device through which almost all personal communication, news, banking, payments, e-money, travel plans, plane and train tickets, medical services, political planning, etc. happen. A smartphone has pretty much become essential for life. A game console has never been that.