3 ms·

I think it would have been more self serving for Epic to strike a backroom deal, they've got the clout to do so and it'd probably be better for their shareholde

I think it would have been more self serving for Epic to strike a backroom deal, they've got the clout to do so and it'd probably be better for their shareholders' blood pressure. On the other hand, if this plays out the way they want, then they get 100% of the income (less overheads) which would be an absolute win for them. I don't think their motivation matters however - as an ISV getting kicked off the app store is no longer a potential death sentence or a wasted investment; you just need to get smart about how you distribute.

dwaite 6y ago
They tried striking a backroom deal first, with a 'and wouldn't it be nice if you gave this to other people as well'. It didn't seem like any sort of legitimate offer - for one, the "deal" would be that Apple would host fortnite for free, review it for free, and make 0% on in-app purchases. Epic also didn't edit the letter properly and accidentally left an "Android" in rather than changing it to "iOS", so presumably they presented Google with the same offer.
- kergonath 6y ago
  And they had the marketing machine ready the second they sued, just to remove any doubt they were acting in good faith.