10 ms·
Epic Games releases "Nineteen Eighty-Fortnite" ad
- eindiran 6y agoIn case you haven't seen it (like I hadn't), this ad is a parody of the 1984 Apple Macintosh ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtvjbmoDx-I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtvjbmoDx-I
- JoblessWonder 6y agoOh man... That ad was huge... HUGE when it was released. It has its own wikipedia entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_(advertisement) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_(advertisement)
- KingFelix 6y agoRidley Scott directed too!
- Taniwha 6y agoWell hugeish ... originally it only played nationwide once (but in the superbowl) However Epic's rework is very on point - Apple has become what it originally claimed it was rising up against
- JoblessWonder 6y agoWell they got enough press that they didn't have to air it themselves. The media was doing it for them. :) For example, I've seen the commercial multiple times on various programs and I wasn't even born when it was released.
- sneak 6y agoI remember walking into the latest generation of flagship Apple store (the cantilevered one) and thinking “man, who’s job is it now to throw the sledgehammer at the jumbotron?” I wanted to do it but didn’t want a felony on my record. I think that would have been sort of neat, but didn’t know a good way to get the Ridley Scott five minutes hate clip played on it, which would have been critical for the gag. A fun thought, regardless.
- Pfhreak 6y agoWho watches this ad and doesn't immediately realize how ridiculous it is? Epic is a multi-billion dollar company taking pot shots at another multi-billion dollar company. Are people so easily swayed to their particular favorite capitalists? Have we really not moved on from "Sega does what Nintendon't"? Edit: To be clear, I'm not supporting Apple here. I just think this particular ad is a wild shot to take. I know it's a reference to the original Apple ad, I just think it's completely overdone.
- bhaak 6y agoThis reality is crazy. Every year we're thinking it can't get more surreal.
- davidg109 6y agoMove over Netflix, this Apple vs Epic is the shit worth watching. Your move Apple.
- coldcode 6y agoNot really. It's basic contract law versus some small game company lawyers (compared to Apple's). Also, putting out parody ads and making fun of the whole thing will get you zero points in any court. Even if a court accepts this at all it will take years to finish. Meanwhile Epic is out of luck.
- jcranmer 6y agoEpic isn't trying to win at judicial court with this ad; it's trying to win at the court of popular opinion here.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- nytesky 6y agoNetflix and Amazon make you carry out purchases offline, and then they don’t pay for the store fee. Why doesn’t Epic just have a subscription model, wouldn’t that circumvent the App Store? Credit card companies charge 3% just to swipe a credit card (and fixed fees can make small transactions 10-15%) — Apple is charging for hosting the game, certifying and ensuring security for its user base, and carrying out the financial transaction. What would be the appropriate percentage?
- room500 6y agoNo - hey.com tried to have an outside subscription model and they were rejected from the app store. Netflix and Amazon have special deals in place - the Amazon deal was made public in the recent investigations. Apple claims that the special deal is only available to select video streaming services.
- arduinomancer 6y agoThe whole strategy here feels pretty unprecedented. Usually these kind of lawsuits happen in the background but Epic seems to be going full force with making it a public campaign. > Apple is blocking your ability to get the latest Fortnite updates! All players should have a choice in payment providers and save up to 20%. Apple wants to limit your payment choices! Join the fight against @AppStore on social with #FreeFortnite Can't imagine being in the room of Apple's PR team reacting to this.
- chillacy 6y agoThe video also uses the word "monopoly", which plays right into the current anti-trust sentiment. Now's the best time to pull something like this. If I had to guess, Fortnite players probably drive a lot of demand for iPod Touch.
- Pfhreak 6y agoThey not only had the lawsuit in hand and ready, but an ad and a deployment strategy to get it launched in game. Epic was clearly planning to go fully public at scale on this issue.
- user5994461 6y agoThe Apple fees must be in the order of a million dollar every couple days for Epic Games. Expect a full-on battle of the same magnitude. It is well worth it.
- sushid 6y agoYou don't know that unless you know what the legal costs are, their odds of winning the suit, the lost $$ and opportunity cost due to no sales on iOS, the revenue loss from their 20% discount on V-Bucks, etc.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- 6y ago
- dgritsko 6y agoAs someone who neither uses the App Store nor plays Fortnite, this is fascinating to watch unfold.
- tibbydudeza 6y agoIt is Zoomers vs Boomers.
- phone8675309 6y agoHmmm, essential oil powered zoomers versus psychic surgery killed boomers? Which one will win?!
- sushid 6y agoZoomers are no the ones selling essential oil. You're a few generations off there.
- cloudking 6y agoApple is providing the platform that enables Epic to distribute their game for FREE to a billion+ users. Why shouldn't they take a cut from the in-app purchase monetization? It costs Apple server hosting, bandwidth, engineering to provide this service. Providing an alternative payment method at a discount is not the answer here, obviously players will choose the cheaper option. If Epic wants more money, maybe they should negotiate a smaller cut.
- Jolter 6y agoThat’s exactly what Epic is trying to do. Their point is that the cut is too big, yet Apple refuses to negotiate.
- m3kw9 6y agoAny cut apple makes is too big in a corporation’s view. Even at 5% they will look to get it down to zero
- la_oveja 6y agoEpic could distribute the game themselves easily, if you don't remember they have their own videogame store in PC. They do the same on Android.
- beaner 6y ago> Apple is providing the platform that enables Epic to distribute their game for FREE to a billion+ users. Why shouldn't they take a cut from the in-app purchase monetization? Then they should charge the developer for install costs + profit, not charge for all transactions happening in the game that have nothing to do with Apple and impose no cost on them. That's retarded. It's like a landlord taking 30% of sales from the local florist rather than just charging rent. Totally messed up.
- colesantiago 6y agoApple has become what they hated in IBM and Epic Games called them out.
- nine_k 6y agoI think they stopped hating it when they walked away from the openness of Apple II into the all-closed design of the original Macintosh. Apple wanted to be a huge corporation, and they succeeded. They also wanted to be a sexy and adored big corp, and here their success is colossal, no IBM could compare. Google used to compare, but they started to lose their luster in the eyes of the tech-savvy trendsetters some time around 2015. I suspect Apple is going to get a similar treatment some time in the future.
- valine 6y agoI don’t care about Fortnite, but I would love to have the option to install alternative apps stores on iOS. This has to be the most dramatic example of “running to the press” to date, which I’m sure Apple loathes. If nothing else it’s entertaining.
- loktarogar 6y agoMore than that. They had all this (the vid, the lawsuit, the social media campaign to mobilise their fans) ready to go, and baited Apple into kicking them off the App Store.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y agoI don't know if the term 'baiting' can be applied to flagrantly violating TOS.
- loktarogar 6y agoPretty much the definition. They could either play Epic's game by booting them off or face potentially other apps breaking TOS in response. Epic was aiming for a certain reaction and they achieved it.
- rched 6y agoI'm curious as to why as a user you want alternative app stores? I understand as a developer why you would but it is less obvious to me how it would improve the experience for users.
- meheleventyone 6y agoI’m not sure weaponising a demographic not known for particularly rational responses to things is that good of an idea.
- kyleee 6y agoare you talking about the demographic of "people who play video games"?
- meheleventyone 6y agoNo, more the hardcore minority that give people who play videogames (like myself for 30+ years!) a bad name.
- minimaxir 6y agoEpic is showing the commercial on an infinite loop on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FortniteGame/status/1294006412931223552 https://twitter.com/FortniteGame/status/1294006412931223552 (Infinite Loop pun not intended)
- bmarquez 6y agoI thought it was cool that in the video, the Apple developer agreement (requiring a 30% cut) was faintly placed on the walls. A nod to the "walled garden" term.
- akerro 6y agoSo the next IT revolution is turning kids against one of the biggest corporation in the world? Sounds good to me.
- Pfhreak 6y agoWeaponizing the firehose of vitriol of gamers is a wild approach to take. Let's see if it pays off for them.
- Animats 6y agoIt's going to be interesting. Epic might be able to reposition the image of Apple phones. Black and white design, dull colors, fragile... Old people phones.
- Smilliam 6y agoIt's a tried and true approach at this point in history. Remember Steve Bannon? [1] Weaponizing (angry, disenfranchised) gamers is the hot trend of the last decade. [1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/talkingtech/2017/07/18/steve-bannon-learned-harness-troll-army-world-warcraft/489713001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/talkingtech/2017/07/18/s...
- Apocryphon 6y agoA decade ago, yet another company (the upstart doubleTwist) dared to challenge Apple's control of their platform by advocating for a secondary content store: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdVzboF2E2Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdVzboF2E2Q Story: https://techcrunch.com/2009/09/29/doubletwist-remakes-apples-classic-1984-ad-with-a-new-dictator-steve-jobs/ https://techcrunch.com/2009/09/29/doubletwist-remakes-apples... HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=851088 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=851088 History repeats, and rhymes.
- vedant_shety 6y agoBut doubleTwist was much smaller with a really niche audience.
- Apocryphon 6y agoYou're right, but I'm just establishing there's precedence.
- siavosh 6y agoI can't put my finger on its validity, but it all resonates the same to me: - Listening to billionaires arguing with each other about what society should be for the benefit of all since this recession started & - Trillions and billions of dollar companies battling it out as if they were the underdog in the public arena for the sympathy of us mere wage earners. The pervading sense I think from Left to Right is the system is rotten and we're mere spectators being told to root for one unfathomably rich entity vs another unfathomably rich entity. You can almost understand the anarchist, burn it all down meme.
- product50 6y agoStop making strawman arguments around billionaires and trillion $$ companies. The only company which can take on Apple is another large company with passionate user following. Small developers like you and me just come here on Hacker News and argue. But it leads to nothing as Apple simply ignores us.
- gigel82 6y agoI partly agree, but I think it's awesome that a huge company is taking on the fight instead of "negotiating" special fee adjustments like Amazon is doing in the backroom. If the fight is successful, that will benefit everyone.
- freeone3000 6y agoBurn it all down. Create a new society formed from mutual aid and non-heirchial power structures. Capitalism is the disease.
- tempestn 6y agoThere was a great deal of "burn it all down" sentiment around Trump's election. From my perspective, it wasn't and isn't productive. I'd rather see energy behind a sentiment like "real reform now" instead.
- freeone3000 6y ago
- Johnjonjoan 6y agoDo the ends justify the means? The way I see it Apple will be rightfully scrutinised but only because a giant corporation used propoganda on its users. The lowest common denominator: "they're stopping you playing the game!!!"
- spzb 6y agoThey’re only preventing new installs. Most Fortnite fans with iPhones will already have the game installed. It still works fine. I just tried it myself
- Johnjonjoan 6y agoUntil there's an update.
- spzb 6y agoIt downloaded a 1.4 gig update when I opened it
- Johnjonjoan 6y agoInteresting. Does your ability to download past updates mean you'll be able to download future ones though? There's no doubt in my mind epic are using the they are stopping you playing argument - they literally say in the advert it's been blocked from a billion devices. I mean if that statement is technically not true then don't you think it's propoganda? Edit: I shouldn't have said technically not true but that they are being very economical with the truth.
- Tade0 6y agoA certain dynamite-throwing villain would rightly point out here that "hey, as long as it works".
- janderson3 6y agoI find it fascinating that in that ad the schlubs that are sitting there watching the television are Fortnite default skins and not say, replicas of the characters that hold the same position in the original Apple ad. This really supports Dan Olson manufactured discontent assertion[0]. Even if you support them and play their game, if you don't spend money for skins, you're still in Big Brother's audience. The wildest thing is that the Jackboots behind the hammer thrower are approximate replicas of the Apple Ad. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPHPNgIihR0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPHPNgIihR0
- resu_nimda 6y agoI don't play games anymore and I'm not a big fan of the whole microtransactions/F2P model, but I found that video somewhat uncompelling. Not that long ago, the MMO standard was $15 a month* (plus the initial $50+). Not to unlock the cool stuff, but simply to play at all. And nobody felt like there was anything sinister about it. With Fortnite, you can play for free as much as you like, or (based on what I gathered from the video) pay <$10 every 2.5 months to be on the cool track. Seems like a pretty good deal in comparison, assuming that they're rolling out new (non-shop) content at a reasonable rate. Even if you support them and play their game How are you supporting them if you don't pay? Sure, they benefit from network effects, but ultimately they obviously need a lot of paying customers. Have we really gotten to the point where people expect to play AAA games for free and view it as audacious if the developers incentivize people to pay for things? As mentioned, I did much prefer the old model because it precluded this kind of stuff from seeping into the experience, but I don't think there's anything fundamentally sinister or wrong with trying to push people towards paying for your game (though I will say the "let me see your Marsh Walk emote" stuff was pretty cringey, but that's another story). *I realize that Fortnite is not an MMO but it seems to fit the bill for something you would pay a subscription for these days. You could hold the Battle Pass for over a year for the classic $50-60 game price.
- invokestatic 6y agoIn 2010, Valve made a 1984-esque trailer for Half Life, titled “Free Yourself”. Ironically, it announced that Half Life was ported to Mac OS X. https://youtube.com/watch?v=2zkLh_QMFdQ https://youtube.com/watch?v=2zkLh_QMFdQ
- david-cako 6y agoWild times we live in. Steve would be proud.
- egypturnash 6y agoI wonder if anyone has any data on what percentage of the kids who play Fortnite on iOS have access to anything else to play it on. Because I feel like that number will be very important to anyone at Apple contemplating "okay, fuck it, who cares, what if we just pulled Epic's authorization to run these things on iOS entirely". There are probably a bunch of other reasons to not consider that option but I would bet money there are people on both sides of this argument giving serious thought to that option.
- lai 6y agoThey must've made this video prior to launching their new payments system because they knew this was going to happen. This is incredible.
- sjwmozilla 6y agoI like the font they use at the end, anybody got its name?
- hnarn 6y agoProbably this, since it's the "Fortnite Font": https://houseind.com/hi/burbank https://houseind.com/hi/burbank
- Ivoirians 6y agoThis is going to be a fascinating PR war. Apple was probably caught by surprise with how immediately public Epic was willing to take this. But besides the fun of that wonderful drama unfolding over the next months/years, I actually feel like this could be catastrophic for Apple's image. Epic has an underestimated amount of influence and clout over the Gen Z crowd, and by aggressively rallying teenage gamers against Apple, I think anti-Apple sentiment could become popular (or viral) where it basically was nonexistent before (outside of some techie/developer circles).
- wvenable 6y agoI don't think Epic has that much influence. If I were Apple's PR team, I think I'd just completely ignore them. Treat them as utterly and completely irrelevant. Personally I think Apple's 30% cut is ridiculous and the fact that there is zero market pressure on that them to price it appropriately should mean something. But at the same time I'm not sure Epic has any legal leg to stand on.
- newbie578 6y agoAnd that is exactly why you are not Apple's PR team. I understand your POW and I would have shared it also if not for the kids in the house where you can actually see how dominating Epic is. There is a whole sub-culture around Fortnite, it expands from just playing a simple game on your iPad to being a way of communication on TikTok (e.g. dance moves). And you bet that when those little kids start whining to their parents, some noise will be generated. I have honestly nothing more to say, except well played Fortnite! Perfect execution.
- wvenable 6y agoI play Fortnite and my kids play Fortnite and I still don't think it's that dominating. Kids have plenty of outlets and Fortnite is one of many. But even if I agree what, exactly, is Apple going to be able to say or do? What response could they possibly have that would placate children? It's better to not fuel the flames.
- 6y ago
- tanilama 6y agowow, the drama begins I think Epic did the right thing. 30% Apple Tax needs to go and go for good. Apple provided limited usefulness in the whole transaction, yet they claim 30% of it. Why?
- alkonaut 6y agoIf I was apple I'd quickly exempt Epic and allow them to charge however they want, but not change the rules for anyone else. The number of other players that are large enough to have this kind of sway (so could try the same thing) must be pretty small, and going through the courts might hurt more.
- Brendinooo 6y agoDidn't these guys build their own distribution channel and withhold their best game from a competitor so they could 1) build their own walled garden and 2) avoid Steam's 20-30% fee?
- kmlx 6y agoyes. and the community hates them for that.
- ryukafalz 6y agoAnd paid devs who were previously planning Linux releases for exclusivity on their Windows/Mac-only store.
- zamalek 6y agoI hate the epic store. It's riddled with strange and frustrating choices. But there isn't any reason why they couldn't have created it. Steam was (still is?) the monopoly, so they are increasing choices on PC (however awful their specific offering is).
- vernie 6y agoThat sucked way more than I was expecting.
- Foivos 6y agoSpotify had created a dedicated website for similar reasons. https://www.timetoplayfair.com/ https://www.timetoplayfair.com/
- stunt 6y agoI'm interested to see if other companies will join or not. It would be interesting to see if Apple will remove every one of them from App Store or not. Epic parody of 1984 is epic.
- BMSmnqXAE4yfe1 6y agoThe villain in the original ad was, I believe, the IBM.
- onemiketwelve 6y agoIn all the hullabaloo around this drama, I haven't seen any actual mention about what anti trust/ competition is supposed to be about. All I see is "private company, anything goes" vs "Apple owns the market. Apple bad". Not a lawyer. But I've heard some podcasts with lawyers on them. So I'm basically an expert. Isn't the whole pov of courts supposed to be: is this harmful to the consumer? They arrived at this "razor" because just being big and successful by itself isn't automatically bad. What if you're huge because run your business better than everyone else? What if you use your size to invest in more efficient capex that lets you make stuff cheaper? If you pass those on to the consumer, that should be kosher. If you use your large size to push for things that's only good for your own bottom line and pass that cost on to your partners, who then have to pass it onto the customer, then by my crude layman's definition of anti competitiveness, Apple looks very naughty. Especially when the reason you can push certain unpalatable things is because your business is so pervasive and has high switching costs. Most of the time it's fine to let businesses charge whatever the hell they want. If eBay went from 10% fees to 30%! fees people could just go to any other market place. Yeah it sucks to relist inventory, copy photos over, start with no feedback, but it's doable. But I can't just switch simply from Apple to Android. Do you remember the first time you tried to use Linux or macos? How painful was that? And we're nerds! How is the majority of people who don't give a shit about tech deal? And I see the argument of "Apple good" because most of the experience just works so I can definitely swallow a closed appstore with any fees they want to impose. That's exactly the problem though. This is using their size and prevalence in their customers lives to their own disadvantage. This feels anti competitive
- z_ 6y agoHow did this update get passed the App Store audit?
- jedimastert 6y agoI know this is almost off topic, but I find it fascinating and really funny that a company/game well known for "borrowing" pop culture (i.e. the whole dancing thing) is doing the same thing to get their message across.