5 ms·
> Epic had long argued such a cut was unfair, and inflated prices for players. So last year, it offered players the chance to buy the virtual currency direct fr
by monkin 6y ago
> Epic had long argued such a cut was unfair, and inflated prices for players. So last year, it offered players the chance to buy the virtual currency direct from its own website, circumventing Apple and Google.
> That was explicitly against both companies' app store rules - so both removed Fortnite from their stores.
Explicitly against both companies was using OWN in app payment solutions thus bypassing their payment systems and 30% cut. But that whole EPIC drama is just another internet drama, nothing there is about users, online shops, or anything other than money.
Yet, at the end they can’t go and say “we don’t care about any of you, we just want more money!”. So they have to put this stunt in place. :-)
- ApolloFortyNine 6y agoEpic literally showed how it would benefit the consumer in their example. When Apple takes 30%, Epic (and all businesses) have to charge 30% more than they otherwise would be okay with. Even if epic only relays 10% of that back to the consumer, the consumer still comes out ahead. And if you don't like fortnite as an example, use any app on the platform you might pay for. They all pay an unavoidable 30% Apple tax.
- bluesign 6y agoWhy would epic relay back 10% to the consumer? There is not a single motivation for that. Imagine Epic cut a deal with apple for 10%, you think prices would be cheaper ? or they would grow their margin.
- ohgodplsno 6y agoEpic do lower their prices in cases where the payment provider lowers the price. Their prices are up to 20% lower when going through their own provider. https://www.epicgames.com/fortnite/en-US/news/the-fortnite-mega-drop-permanent-discounts-up-to-20-percent https://www.epicgames.com/fortnite/en-US/news/the-fortnite-m...
- hulitu 6y agoThe prices are lower now because they are trying to make a point. When this reason will dissapear they have no reason not to raise the price again.
- ENGNR 6y agoThey do have competing products though, like other games and things. 30% of all of the money spent on devs, marketing, ops, that's a LOT of overhead just for checking some code isn't malicious
- ohgodplsno 6y agoYou do realise that Epic has been at the forefront of reducing percentage shares by publishers, right? From UE4 being made free and the initial $1 million being without fees, to EGS taking only a 12% cut (that includes the 5% fee if using UE4) which put massive pressure on Steam to drop their percentage cut too.
- supergirl 6y agoa broad ruling will help all app developers though. imagine being able to make apps without having to bend over backwards to please apple/google's 1000 pages terms of service and without giving them 30%. that's a third of all your revenue that goes to apple/google because they can.
- tchalla 6y agoWhat process should be used to come up with a number? Currently, that magic number is 30% or 15% (if revenue is less than $1M per year) progressive charge decided by Apple.
- monkin 6y ago> that's a third of all your revenue that goes to apple/google because they can. It’s not because “they can”. It is because they distribute it and give you huge audience of potential customers. Second, I’ll trust them more with my card than some third-party shady payment processor. You know how many scams would surface without them? So I’m really fine with Apple/Google taking my 30%, but I’m probably alone. :-)
- sumedh 6y ago> It is because they distribute it and give you huge audience of potential customers. Epic and many others dont need the distribution though. Gamers can easily go to Epic and download and install the apps themselves.