The millions of people whose income is tied to it for a start. It would be a seriously massive disruption to the industry.
-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
The Video Game Corporate War: Epic Games vs Apple and Google
- Thread starter ultimanecat
- Start date
The millions of people whose income is tied to it for a start. It would be a seriously massive disruption to the industry.
Cromwell
Arcane
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2013
- Messages
- 5,443
a game is not an opinion and twitter is not apple. If you go that route of logic ever store would be forced to sell whatever product it is you want sold just because the store exists. The argument people make against twitter for example is that it is too big and therefore too damaging to you not to be there and theres also the thing with content provider versus publisher. its apples and oranges pun not intended and while I cant call sweeny todds argumentation absolutely retard I also cant get behind it 100%. But I am also no Judge to decide that.
Viata
Arcane
When I buy a computer, I'm free to select what OS I want. When I buy an apple phone, I'm not allowed to change the OS. So, I'm already locked in their proprietary device, why should I be free to sell whatever I want via any means in their own proprietary device? Microsoft doesn't force me to buy games on their service because at the end of the day, I can easily change the OS to linux and buy it via another means. You can't do that on a smartphone, you are already locked in their service. If you don't want to sell your product on apple app store, go sell it on the google play and done. You don't get into someone's else service and complain it doesn't allow you to ignore their service and do your own thing.
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2010
- Messages
- 1,871,752
Twitter already does this.
V_K
Arcane
Sure, now comare that image with this one:random image showing kwa market share
apple can decide who is able to install shit on their devices
meanwhile microsoft lost its monopoly case in 2001 because you couldnt UNINSTALL IE and that it was PREINSTALLED
...and realize why your IE analogy doesn't work.Windows market share in 2018 said:
That's an entirely different thing. If Twitter had a 5$ registration fee and someone wanted to create an account without paying, the company should be allowed to stop him. If Apple says that you have to pay a 30% fee on every in-game purchase you get through their products and you don't want to do that, the company should be allowed to stop you.
Why should anyone be allowed to indiscriminately profit from the product of a private company, if that profit goes against the interests of that company?
That said, giant tech companies are obviously too strong nowadays and every possible regulation against them is fine by me.
Drakron
Arcane
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
- Messages
- 6,326
MS case was more about licensing agreements with OEMs, you still have a browser with your Windows OS.
Apple is not doing such things, its not as if they are making agreements were 3rd party phone manufacturers have to only allow the App Store, you know ... the stunt that Epic Store Exclusivity pulls, anti-trust exist to protect the market and not the consumers and certainly not to protect companies profits.
Apple is not doing such things, its not as if they are making agreements were 3rd party phone manufacturers have to only allow the App Store, you know ... the stunt that Epic Store Exclusivity pulls, anti-trust exist to protect the market and not the consumers and certainly not to protect companies profits.
Yes.
This fight to force internet companies to let you do whatever you want on their website is a really weird hill everyone to the right of Biden is trying to die on lately. Some Chinese asshole comes and posts constant spam messages in every thread on the Codex all day long and Infinitron is like "I can't ban this account, sorry. I believe in free speech." Like fuck off. Twitter can delete every single Conservative user on its platform if they want to, and Conservatives can respond by using another service. No one is ever forced to use Twitter and then their life is ruined when they can't. Do I think Twitter it's a good business idea for Twitter to do that? No, and that's why they don't, but they are free to and then you are free to not use Twitter. Freedom baby!
Then that service gets banned by payment processors, but conservatives can respond by starting their own. Then they get refused service by cloudflare, but they can respond by starting their own.
Let's cut to the chase and build our own conservative banking and internet infrastructure from the ground up, huh?
Let me respond to this using conservative language... no one owes you shit. No one owes you a platform, no one owes you funding and no one owes you a listening ear. Freedom means people have the freedom to tell you to fuck off. Simple as that.
Your actual problem is a marketing problem. Liberals have gone for your mainstream culture balls and been effective at it. You want to fight back, but you're not being successful. For all the "he's a fighter!" compliments Trump and Boris and the rest get, they're really bad at actually executing on persuasive arguments outside their core base. You need a message and platform that isn't easily cucked by whiny trannies and soy boys online.
Cool, so when do we get "no niggers allowed" signs at restaurants and stores again?
Viata
Arcane
Sorry mate, there is a limit of how much freedom you have. Usually is the one that allows me to do whatever I want, but not you.
I'd be for that, I hate the civil rights legislation that tells business owners who they can let on their property. I think it would be financial suicide today, but you have the right to do it IMO. Many were against that bill at the time for that reason, but again they lost the marketing war. I back the guy who told the fags to fuck off with their cake order too. I stick to my principles.
rusty_shackleford
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 50,754
The entire idea behind this is ridiculous to begin with. Why should Apple get a 30% cut from something you sold inside your app to a customer?
Imagine if you bought a game on Steam and Microsoft butted in and said "Hey bud, give me my cut now." Ah, what's that, bought something on Amazon? Better give Microsoft their cut.
Personally I'd prefer a boycott of the Apple platform by major apps similar to what Epic is doing over government action. But anyone who thinks this is just Epic pointing out Apple's bullshit has their head in the sand.
https://newsroom.spotify.com/2019-03-13/consumers-and-innovators-win-on-a-level-playing-field/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ntitrust-regulators-need-to-review-app-stores
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_1073
https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/18/...e-hey-email-fees-policies-antitrust-wwdc-2020
Imagine if you bought a game on Steam and Microsoft butted in and said "Hey bud, give me my cut now." Ah, what's that, bought something on Amazon? Better give Microsoft their cut.
Personally I'd prefer a boycott of the Apple platform by major apps similar to what Epic is doing over government action. But anyone who thinks this is just Epic pointing out Apple's bullshit has their head in the sand.
https://newsroom.spotify.com/2019-03-13/consumers-and-innovators-win-on-a-level-playing-field/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ntitrust-regulators-need-to-review-app-stores
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_1073
https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/18/...e-hey-email-fees-policies-antitrust-wwdc-2020
Last edited:
And why should Epic be allowed to distribute their software on Apple's products if Apple doesn't want that?
A boycott of Apple would be the best possible outcome, but it won't happen. People don't buy iPhones because they want to play Fortnite: they play Fortnite because they already have iPhones.
V_K
Arcane
Oh yes, Spotify, such a champion of ethical business practices. Just like Epic.
rusty_shackleford
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 50,754
Why should Valve be allowed to distribute their software on Microsoft's products if Microsoft doesn't want that?
V_K
Arcane
Windows isn't a closed system though, nor is it tied to specific hardware. Game consoles would be a much closer analogy here - and something tells me, MS controls the X-box market just as much as Apple.
Exactly, why?
Valve is allowed to distribute its software on Microsoft's products because Microsoft wants that. If it went against their interests, Microsoft wouldn't allow it. In that case I would be leaning more towards Valve though, because Microsoft's monopoly on non-mobile operative systems is far more prominent.
If that's their business model and you don't want to put up with it, just don't. It may be ridiculous that they want a 30% cut, but they want a cut of your profits because you can make these profits only thanks to the existence of their product. Why should they be forced to let you gain money from their products for free?
Last edited:
rusty_shackleford
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 50,754
Consumers, who are responsible for Microsoft being in its position, want it that way.
And then proceed to get fucked in the ass by various antitrust laws that exist to protect against giant businesses from shitting on the people that helped them get where they are.
bro just ignore 80% of the market lol
The people who purchased their products
Why is it any of their business what people do with products they own?
Why does Apple deserve any cut after they already sold the hardware and software to the end user? The transaction is over.
Good question, same thing Gaben was thinking and that's why he invest in Linux, as what he say is "get out of the jail card" if Microsoft decide to enforce it.
Last edited:
Are you implying that Apple has an 80% market share on mobile operating systems? IIRC, it's something around 20-25%. And they don't have to ignore it, they have to respect the terms of service they signed if they want to access it. They want to indiscriminately gain profit from the products of another company, and I can't see why you think they have the right to do so.
So you are admitting that Apple's product is fundamental, but Epic should be allowed to benefit from the widespread diffusion of iPhones without any sort of compensation to Apple. Why?
Epic wants access to the millions of people who have an iPhone, and without Apple's product their stupid game doesn't run. They could easily build a dumb proprietary console and the people would still exist, but it wouldn't be the same because the pivotal point of their current mobile business model is the existence of an already widespread device.
They haven't sold their store to the end user. Why shouldn't they be able to do whatever the fuck they want with their store? The users bought a very specific product that works in a very specific way: if you want to install something you have to go through their store; I agree with you on the fact that it's complete bullshit, but people like shiny iPhones and we can't do anything about it.
I know people who make clothes for a living. If they want to make money, they have to find a client who wants to sell their clothes to his end users. In order for this to happen, they have to come to terms and accept a series of conditions that depend on the relative power of the two involved parties. This case looks similar to me, with Epic not wanting to accept Apple's conditions, while being in a position of weakness where they have almost zero bargaining power to influence Apple's decisions.
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.