Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Apple Games

Epic's Battle For 'Open Platforms' Ignores Consoles' Massive Closed Market (arstechnica.com) 181

Posted by msmash from the closer-look dept.
Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo demand the same platform control -- and the same 30% fee. From a report: Yesterday, Epic used Fortnite to essentially wage open war against Apple's and Google's mobile app marketplaces. First it added a discounted "Epic Direct Payment" option alongside the standard iOS App Store and Google Play payment options in Fortnite, in direct violation of those stores' policies. Then, when Fortnite was predictably removed from both platforms, Epic filed lawsuits against both companies, alleging "anti-competitive restraints and monopolistic practices" in the mobile app marketplace. That move came alongside a heavy-handed PR blitz, including a video asking players to "join the fight to stop 2020 from becoming '1984.'" But through this entire public fight for "open mobile platforms," as Epic puts it, there is one major set of closed platforms that the company seems happy to continue doing business with. We're speaking, of course, about video game consoles.

The major console makers also all exercise full control over what games and apps can appear in their own walled gardens. When it comes to iOS, Epic says that "by blocking consumer choice in software installation, Apple has created a problem so they can profit from the solution." When it comes to consoles, Epic is silent about the same state of affairs. In this sense, consoles are even more restrictive than Android, where games and apps (including Fortnite) can be sideloaded without using the Google Play Store. Yet Google has earned a lawsuit for its role in this state of affairs, while the console makers have remained undisturbed. In addition to the business implications, console makers' total control of their marketplaces also has a direct impact on the types of content that players get to play. Any game that receives an Adults Only rating from the ESRB isn't welcome on any of the three major consoles, for instance. And if you want to use UWP to code an N64 emulator that works on the Xbox One, Microsoft will pull it down as quickly as it can.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Epic's Battle For 'Open Platforms' Ignores Consoles' Massive Closed Market More

Epic's Battle For 'Open Platforms' Ignores Consoles' Massive Closed Market

Comments Filter:

  • Remember when Epic was cool? (Score:4, Funny)

    by grub ( 11606 ) <slashdot@grub.net> on Friday August 14, 2020 @01:18PM (#60401527) Homepage Journal
    Epic is like that cousin who was cool for so many years then became a junkie (in Epic's case, addiction to Fortnite money).
    At least we still have Unreal and Unreal Tournament to slaughter each other in.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by aitikin ( 909209 )

      Ask Silicon Knights [wikipedia.org] how cool Epic's legal department.

      Not saying Silicon Knights weren't in the wrong (not in the right by any stretch though), merely showing that Epic has always had a litigious streak...

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by fermion ( 181285 )
      In all likelihood, this is simply a method to bypass parental controls. Epic is addicted to Fortnite revenue, and they would make lots more of it if they could exploit kids to steal their parents money and then not have to give it back.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by antdude ( 79039 )

      Go back more like Jazz the Jackrabbit, Jill of The Jungle, etc.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by DrXym ( 126579 )
      That basically sums it up. They're pretending they're freedom fighters in all this but basically they just want to keep all the money for themselves. I'm sure from their perspective they don't see why Apple / Google / Sony / Microsoft / Nintendo expect a cut of the money.

      On the flipside that is the model of these platforms. And they don't see why they should advertise, host, support, patch, and pay the bandwidth for some deadbeat game which reneges on the terms and conditions. And in the case of Android,

  • Who is the biggest platform? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Quakeulf ( 2650167 ) on Friday August 14, 2020 @01:27PM (#60401597)
    As an app developer, Apple has been the worst to develop for in my career. It's almost as if their app store system is not meant for devs. Their extremely clunky way of getting updates and apps in feels like they never progressed past 1999.
    • They haven't. I interviewed with Apple for an internal project, and from what I gathered from my questions they are so compartmentalized that progress is almost impossible. The interview didn't work out, I wasn't willing to travel as much as they said would be required.
      • Travel around? How/where? It seems that anywhere I apply to they suddenly stop sending people around. I really enjoy traveling, but my presence seems to make everyone reconsider.

    • I dislike Apple, but I have to admit that developing for them is one of the easiest experiences. I have no idea what you are comparing it to, if you want bad, I could give you the example of BREW (Verizon's Get It Now). Apart from the lousy dev experience, you paid $1000 per device to be tested, requiring a huge amount of paperwork for it and you needed to pass about 30 or so devices before Verizon could consider you. And after you got in, that's when the real problems started ! I shudder to even think abou

  • They know which side their bread is buttered on. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dgatwood ( 11270 ) on Friday August 14, 2020 @01:28PM (#60401601) Homepage Journal

    They're probably not ignoring those other closed platforms, but rather waiting until they have more leverage before going up against them.

    Epic Games makes nearly all of their Fortnite revenue from gaming consoles. If they sue the console makers, they lose most or all of their revenue, and may not get the contract changes they're looking for, depending on what the courts say. That would be a really stupid opening salvo.

    When going to war, one always starts with the enemy who can cause the least harm in response.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by torkus ( 1133985 )

      Fair point, but I also wonder - do consoles require exclusive buy-through agreements for items and knock a 30% clip off the spend?

      You can buy DLC codes or even physical games and I don't *think* MS/PSN gets a (substantial? any?) cut of that money. I've seen discounted games and codes for the console market. Heck, I can buy various game currency at CVS and I rather doubt 30% of that is going to MS or PSN.

      To me, that seems to be the relevant issue...and then it gets even more tricky. Uber is free but has t

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by EvilSS ( 557649 )
        It varies, but there is still lock-in and you better bet the console makers are getting paid. Physical games, they do get a cut of those (remember before Digital distro, when console makers still sold their consoles at or below cost? Yea, there was a reason for that). As for currency codes, I'm not sure but I'd be willing to bet there is some sort of kick back when the code is redeemed. Many of them you have to buy the card for your platform (GTA V shark cards, for example). Same for DLC. This is why games

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        Fair point, but I also wonder - do consoles require exclusive buy-through agreements for items and knock a 30% clip off the spend?

        You can buy DLC codes or even physical games and I don't *think* MS/PSN gets a (substantial? any?) cut of that money. I've seen discounted games and codes for the console market. Heck, I can buy various game currency at CVS and I rather doubt 30% of that is going to MS or PSN.

        To me, that seems to be the relevant issue...and then it gets even more tricky. Uber is free but has thei

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dgatwood ( 11270 )

          Of course, the real question is to be careful, because maybe Epic might be forced to open up their store as well. And at 18% cut, I might open a store and use it as a personal Paypal style account - because of all the various cuts, 99 cent items will cost at least 30 cents in payment, so if I can make an extra 12 cents through Epic, I might run through my 99 cent items that way.

          Not sure I see a downside there. Either they are making money that way or they aren't. If they aren't, they'll raise rates until

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jythie ( 914043 )
      *nod* from what I gather, iOS makes up a pretty small part of their revenue stream, but there is a lot of room for growth there... so they can afford to take a risk by going after Apple which, if it works, could have big payoffs later, but if it blows up does not hurt them too much now. Consoles on the other hand would really hurt them now and their growth potential is pretty limited.

    • but rather waiting until they have more leverage before going up against them.

      They'll need a lot of leverage to counter the $250 million investment Sony made in Epic Games. https://www.theverge.com/2020/... [theverge.com]

  • Will Epic Allow Third Party Sellers in Fortnite? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Bookwyrm ( 3535 ) on Friday August 14, 2020 @01:34PM (#60401627)

    I mean, why should people have to buy V-Buck from Fortnite and go through Fortnite's storefront to get cosmetic items. Fortnite will most assuredly provide options for third parties to sell items to Fortnite users directly and bypass the V-Buck tax, right? Otherwise they might be holding a monopoly on access to the valuable market of Fortnite players!

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by jellomizer ( 103300 )

      You never had kids, and forgotten what it was like to be one.

      You have the rich kids playing with the non-free styles. vs. the kids with the free styles. Jokes on how they are poor, or just don't play the game enough to be considered good.

      This isn't logical. But these are klds

      • You never had kids, and forgotten what it was like to be one.

        You have the rich kids playing with the non-free styles. vs. the kids with the free styles. Jokes on how they are poor, or just don't play the game enough to be considered good.

        This isn't logical. But these are klds

        I guess what you're saying is true? But what does it have to do with whether they buy those items through Epic's store or a third party?

    • Re:Will Epic Allow Third Party Sellers in Fortnite (Score:4, Informative)

      by El_Muerte_TDS ( 592157 ) on Friday August 14, 2020 @04:39PM (#60402217) Homepage

      Epic allows games distributed via their game store to use any payment processor they want: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/... [gamesindustry.biz]

  • Epic is perfectly capable of establishing their own mobile platform, growing it, and reaping the rewards of their effort if they don't like what Apple or Google does with their platforms.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jemmyw ( 624065 )
      Barrier to entry is an important consideration in anti-monopoly laws. Google and Apple are an entrenched duopoly. You may we well be saying to someone complaining about high electricity prices they should just build their own power station if it bothers them so much.
  • Consoles are a bit different as they aren't general purpose computers. More importantly though, the business model is also very different. Consoles are commonly sold at a loss merely from a hardware perspective omitting the cost of R&D. To me it falls more into a shade of grey, like Epic's arguments against the Google Play Store, while the Apple situation is black and white in abusing their market power.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by flink ( 18449 )

      Modern consoles are essentially PCs with a couple of special high bandwidth buses for GPU and SSD I/O. The main distinguishing feature is that they have a hardware assisted hypervisor that makes sure only authorized software can run on the platform. Not unlike iPhone + iOS.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by EvilSS ( 557649 )
      They are not general purpose computers because the console makers say so, not because of any inherit technological limitations. As for selling at a loss, that's the console maker's fault, not mine and not any third party dev's. I don't have to bend to their business model if it's flawed. There is not way you can stand there and say the Apple case is black and white and not also do so for consoles. None.

      • They are not general purpose computers because the console makers say so, not because of any inherit technological limitations.

        That's correct. But the console makers have "always" said so (PS3 Linux aside.)

        As for selling at a loss, that's the console maker's fault, not mine and not any third party dev's. I don't have to bend to their business model if it's flawed.

        Apple historically hasn't used this model. Then they said "Well it's different for phones". It makes the most sense to go after Apple first because their defense is weakest.

        There is not way you can stand there and say the Apple case is black and white and not also do so for consoles.

        It's not morally or logically different, it's legally different. But if they win the case with Apple, they'll be in a much stronger position to go after the console manufacturers.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by EvilSS ( 557649 )

          That's correct. But the console makers have "always" said so (PS3 Linux aside.)

          So what? All that means is that no one has challenged them on it. That does not make it any sort of legal precedent, as that would actually require, you know, someone to challenge them on it.

          Apple historically hasn't used this model. Then they said "Well it's different for phones". It makes the most sense to go after Apple first because their defense is weakest.

          Again, so what? This makes no difference legally. As for going after them first, it's less about weakness, more about cutting off their revenue. Epic makes way more money on console versions of Fortnite than they do on mobile.

          It's not morally or logically different, it's legally different.

          I'm going to need you to support this assertion, because as far as I can see, they are in no

          • Apple set the precedent of permitting third party applications before they decided you couldn't on their new class of device. Even the Newton permitted it. It's also standard to be able to load your own apps on phones. Only the iPhone has ever prohibited it.

            Only two mainstream consoles have ever permitted you to run your own software without jumping through hoops. One was Net Yaroze, which was special but available for sale regardless. The other was the PS3. I expect Sony to be the next target if this actio

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by EvilSS ( 557649 )
              You realize those aren’t legal precedents right? That’s like saying it’s all right to behave in a monopolistic matter because you’ve always behaved in a monopolistic matter. That’s not how the law works.

  • Apples to oranges (Score:3)

    by RJFerret ( 1279530 ) on Friday August 14, 2020 @01:47PM (#60401681)

    Apple's Mac product has software which may be purchased anywhere, developed in any fashion, etc.

    Google's other products are accessed from Macs, Windows, iOS, Android, all over the place.

    This differs dramatically from consoles, where the inherent initial design is limited, more akin to a standalone arcade machine custom designed for one game. Epic might be establishing legal precedent, but I doubt consoles would be seen in the same light as there are competing console platforms. There are costs inherent in working with developers to establish titles on consoles.

    The Apple store is akin to a protection racket. You don't do business unless you do what they say and pay them despite them not bringing any value to the relationship. Google's less onerous as there are alternatives, but they are the main one and their recent packaging changes negatively impact other options.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by EvilSS ( 557649 )
      Bullshit. What consoles do is not different from what Apple does: You must play by their rules, distribute through their approved distribution systems, or you are not allowed on the hardware. Just because they try to limit the uses of the hardware to games is not a valid argument, since that limitation is a artifact of the control the console makers have over the consoles. You mention a stand-alone arcade machine, should a 3rd party be banned from making their own game ROMs, with their own (as in, they wro

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by vux984 ( 928602 )

      There's a couple other details which you didn't address.

      The biggest is the fact that mobile phones are really - one per user; while consoles are frequently multiple per user / multiple users console.

      Lots of people have multiple consoles, or a console plus laptops/PCs etc. So these people can access fortnite via a variety of options and if Nintendo were to eject or otherwise prove inhospitable it'll piss people off but they won't be impacted the same way. It's perfectly reasonable for people to have to get d

  • All platforms are not alike.

    Playing a game on a mobile device? you are stuck on closed platforms.

    Want to play a game on a 'static' device? Well you can choose to play it on a closed platform (PSx, Xbox, Nintendo, etc) or you can play it on another platform (PC).

    There's no choice on the mobile platform.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by EvilSS ( 557649 )
      Your argument is flawed as Android also allows you to side load, so you DO have the same choice on mobile.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by fazig ( 2909523 )
      There's a lot of games that are exclusive to consoles or even certain consoles. Nintendo has a lot of games like that. The Pokemon, Mario, Zelda, and perhaps Animal Crossing brands are probably what keeps the lights on in that business.

      But I'd say that going after Apple and Google is still a start. It's better than nothing.
      Pointing fingers at Epic because they don't do the same with consoles has the unmistakable stench of whataboutery sticking to it.


      If they succeed at this, which I hope they do, this

    • > Playing a game on a mobile device? you are stuck on closed platforms.

      What, have you only ever used an iPhone? I currently have three app distribution platforms on my Android and there are others.

  • Hopefully the antitrust scrutiny on Apple wedges open the consoles as well.

    Enough with the walled gardens.

    It should be illegal to disallow sideloading on any computer that has an app development platform.

  • Epic Games Store (Score:3)

    by sanosuke001 ( 640243 ) on Friday August 14, 2020 @02:06PM (#60401729)

    The same thing on PC; they want freedom on iOS and Android but force PC players to use Epic to install games (and even run them) that are only available on their marketplace, paying the developers for exclusivity deals. Don't get me wrong; I do not want to go back to the wild west of game updates, downloading them from the developers' site and all manually so the infrastructure is definitely worth SOMETHING (which another reason I think Epic's current direct payment is still a bit bullshit even if the 30% cut is excessive). However, they do the same shit to make $$$.

  • Transactions these days cost pennies to process. Online transactions cost more like 2.5% - 5% of the transaction because there is more fraud that must be dealt with. But an ongoing 30% of every ongoing sale is absolute robbery. If the claim by Apple and Google Play is that this covers things like security review then charge for the security review each update separately, not an ongoing charge. A basic $1 app with 10 downloads pays Apple $3 for a security review. Epic on the other hand assuming they make $

    • Remember when Microsoft was forced to offer other search options within their dominant internet explorer browser, I feel like this is similar because it is a clear abuse of monopoly power

      Microsoft is a piece of software on an open platform. Apple is a vertically integrated closed platform who doesn't owe you as a developer shit.
      Microsoft got done for targeting a company, Apple treats all developers equally regardless if you're some dude with an SDK, or a rich fuckwit with Fortnite money.

      It's important to learn these differences when talking about monopoly abuse. It'll show you why Apple isn't.

  • Come on.

    How much clearer can this be? It isn't about a better experience or an 'open' garden.

    They want that 30% that Apple has been skimming off the top.

    If they were truly trying to be open, they wouldn't have gone ahead and established their OWN walled-off store. They could quite easily have restricted their releases to say, GOG.

  • Epic knows that if they like the consoles will black ball you.
    Look at Nintendo when they got away with telling developers if you develop for Atari we will not let you on our platform,

  • If Epic (or anyone else) can make legal headway against Apple and/or Google, then they can turn their attention on the consoles. If a precedent is established, it'll be much easier to go after other monopolists. And Epic fails, at least they've only spent money fighting one legal battle.

  • I think Epic is attempting to set a precedent. After they have done so then they can go after the video game makers.
    Fact is, people who make 'hardware' SHOULD NOT be allowed to control what software runs on it ! People who make an operating system SHOULD NOT be in control of what can run on it either. That is exactly how MS ( sort of) lost it's anti-trust suit.

    Why do I say should not ? The purpose of law is supposed to server the greater good. So law has to allow a certain room for profit otherwise th

  • Then take issue with the entire industry of micro transaction/freemium gaming.

  • No surprise (hypocrites) (Score:5, Informative)

    by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Friday August 14, 2020 @05:16PM (#60402295)

    Epic Games and more importantly Tim Sweeney are the biggest hypocrites in the industry. They complain about openness and yet introduce the most closed feature of consoles (3rd party paid exclusives) to the PC in order to prop up their incredibly sub par store. All the while they claim to be the good guys by stating they are only serving to bring down the cost of a far more capable and feature rich service (who can forget Epic releasing Tetris Effect with Steam VR binaries because they don't offer that feature in their crappy store themselves)

    But as to why they ignore consoles, that could have to do with Sony's $250million stake in Epic Games: https://www.theverge.com/2020/... [theverge.com]

    Fuck Epic. They are the worst thing to happen to gaming in a long time. It's a shame that make a really good video game engine since that makes it a bit too difficult to boycott them completely.

  • Not much to say other than, $250 million is a small price to pay to buy out a hypocrite https://www.theverge.com/2020/... [theverge.com]

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • as fly by night companies crapflooded the market with shovelware and the VCS ended up drowning in a river of shit

      For those that didn't thousands of shady devs took a big nasty shit all over Steam with asset flips and broken garbage and knock offs so it became like trying to wade through a cesspool to find anything good.

      Have you seen some of the cheap indies on the Nintendo E-shop and PSN lately? Quick and dirty mobile ports, knock offs, broken garbage and so forth.

      https://www.nintendo.com/games... [nintendo.com]

      Or the Skylight Freerange games on PSN.

      Did Sony and Nintendo think bad press from crappy indies is better than bad press from some Bob Pelloni-clone having a meltdown and blaming them because they wouldn't publish his game?

      So while I'm a firm believer that console companies should have to allow a way to unlock a console for non console uses (such as Linux)

      Totally agree, but when they do some "software freedom" spouting guy tries to figure out how to use the abi

Slashdot Top Deals

I tell them to turn to the study of mathematics, for it is only there that they might escape the lusts of the flesh. -- Thomas Mann, "The Magic Mountain"

Close