3 ms·

Serious question - does anyone really think of Sweeney as the underdog here and that he's fighting for the "little guy" gamer? Honestly asking to me it seems l

Serious question - does anyone really think of Sweeney as the underdog here and that he's fighting for the "little guy" gamer? Honestly asking to me it seems like a position to take to generate some political power but at the end of the day he's representing large corporate interests as well.

ARandumGuy 3y ago
Both Google and Epic are large for-profit companies, and are primarily concerned with maximizing investor returns. Neither company should be considered "the good guy." Despite that, I'm still glad that Epic won this case, as I believe they're in the right. But just because I think they're in the right with this court case does not mean I think that they're "the good guy," nor that they're concerned with gamers. Epic clearly has their own agenda, and in this specific case it aligns with my own.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
DuctTapeAI 3y ago
From what I understand it's all ego and ethics from him - the board is not stoked about the risk involved and the potential upside. I think Epic has something to gain by removing app store fees for medium sized games though - that would put money back in their pocket creating an opportunity to charge more for Unreal revshare.
zamadatix 3y ago
Underdog yes, it's a multi billion dollar company going after multi trillion dollar companies. Fighting for the little guy nah, fighting for their own interests. Those interests are probably closer to aligning with what the typical small/individual player might want than what the larger players want but that's not why they are doing it.
nfriedly 3y ago
Yeah, to my view, it's one giant corporation battling another giant corporation, with little regard for end users like me. I suppose Epic is the smaller of the two, so relative to Google, maybe they are the underdog. But compared to me they're both "big dogs". In general, I am in favor of breaking up monopolies and making smart phones and other devices more open so, on the surface, this seems like a good result.
hudsonjr 3y ago
I think he was broken by "Games for Windows Live" on PC. They had to integrate it in Gears of War, and I think a lot of the industry saw it as Microsoft trying to steer the PC into being a MSFT only device. There was not much benefit for devs/pubs to using it, it was all good for Microsoft. He seems to want everything to be old school PC where anyone can sell in their own store and do what they want on a device. However, it always feels weird to me on mobile since those devices were not really open and the maker always took their store cut. Epic knew this and got on those devices anyway, but then after Fortnite getting huge, wanted more of that mobile pie for themselves. That's sort of a generic take on mobile, as I haven't read through everything on this case.

ARandumGuy 3y ago

Both Google and Epic are large for-profit companies, and are primarily concerned with maximizing investor returns. Neither company should be considered "the good guy." Despite that, I'm still glad that Epic won this case, as I believe they're in the right. But just because I think they're in the right with this court case does not mean I think that they're "the good guy," nor that they're concerned with gamers. Epic clearly has their own agenda, and in this specific case it aligns with my own.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

DuctTapeAI 3y ago

From what I understand it's all ego and ethics from him - the board is not stoked about the risk involved and the potential upside. I think Epic has something to gain by removing app store fees for medium sized games though - that would put money back in their pocket creating an opportunity to charge more for Unreal revshare.

zamadatix 3y ago

Underdog yes, it's a multi billion dollar company going after multi trillion dollar companies. Fighting for the little guy nah, fighting for their own interests. Those interests are probably closer to aligning with what the typical small/individual player might want than what the larger players want but that's not why they are doing it.

nfriedly 3y ago

Yeah, to my view, it's one giant corporation battling another giant corporation, with little regard for end users like me. I suppose Epic is the smaller of the two, so relative to Google, maybe they are the underdog. But compared to me they're both "big dogs". In general, I am in favor of breaking up monopolies and making smart phones and other devices more open so, on the surface, this seems like a good result.

hudsonjr 3y ago

I think he was broken by "Games for Windows Live" on PC. They had to integrate it in Gears of War, and I think a lot of the industry saw it as Microsoft trying to steer the PC into being a MSFT only device. There was not much benefit for devs/pubs to using it, it was all good for Microsoft. He seems to want everything to be old school PC where anyone can sell in their own store and do what they want on a device. However, it always feels weird to me on mobile since those devices were not really open and the maker always took their store cut. Epic knew this and got on those devices anyway, but then after Fortnite getting huge, wanted more of that mobile pie for themselves. That's sort of a generic take on mobile, as I haven't read through everything on this case.