4 ms·
I sometimes wonder if Apple didn't come up with this model of charging devs 30% even Google wouldn't have too. These companies often end up with similar policie
by Crazyontap 6y ago
I sometimes wonder if Apple didn't come up with this model of charging devs 30% even Google wouldn't have too. These companies often end up with similar policies. But that one greedy kid showed everyone how easy it is to leech off on hard work of devs (who are also to be blame as we happily agreed to this BS) and now it's a common practice.
If safari browser had a Safari store with 30% cut pretty sure chrome extension store would also be charging 30% instead of their 5% now.
- koonsolo 6y ago30% is pretty common, just look at Steam. You can download and install games on you Windows machine straight from any website. Yet Steam was able to take a 30% cut and be very successful. The fact remains that developers are very happy to give 30% when their sales increase with a few factors.
- dbrgn 6y agoThat argument may be valid for Steam. But Google Play is a de-facto monopoly and the Apple App Store is a full (and enforced) monopoly. They can charge 30% because there is no viable alternative for the developers.
- curryst 6y agoSteam also offers a more substantial service. They have fairly significant social services from chat to profiles to the ability to join a friend's game right from Steam. The downloads are also usually substantially larger (although the average price is also significantly higher). The same is true of most of the desktop game stores. I don't know what the real pricing should be, but I can't see how the pricing for something like Google's games would match up against Steam. They don't have feature parity, and some of the features they have are way less useful on mobile. E.g. I wouldn't use their chat even if it existed; my phone already has 4 or 5 messengers.