Like, I don't like either company involved and all that but I feel this is one of those "Seems obviously retaliatory" situations. Interesting to see how this plays out.
Like, I don't like either company involved and all that but I feel this is one of those "Seems obviously retaliatory" situations.
Epic has actually slowly won me over, over the years. I hate the idea of platform exclusives in general, and loathe the idea of them on PC, so I genuinely despised Epic at first for essentially...
Epic has actually slowly won me over, over the years. I hate the idea of platform exclusives in general, and loathe the idea of them on PC, so I genuinely despised Epic at first for essentially bribing so many third-party developers to release their games exclusively on Epic Games Store. And I was also extremely skeptical of their far more developer friendly sales fees, and their public statements about wanting to reduce the unfair 20-30% cut being taken by most other digital storefronts. I thought it was all just self-serving PR bullshit.
But after reading about all the shady shit that all the other platforms have been doing over the years, which was revealed during the Epic v Apple and v Google lawsuits, I now feel like Epic might have been genuine in their stated intent all along. I still fucking hate platform exclusives on PC, but I actually admire Epic for its lawsuits against the other platform giants, appreciate them still only taking a 12% cut from developers, and also totally understand now why so many developers have taken Epic's very generous exclusivity deals as well.
For me I compartmentalize Epic based on their actions on Mobile, with their game engine, and with their game store. On the mobile front, I'm all for them rocking the boat, even when I find their...
For me I compartmentalize Epic based on their actions on Mobile, with their game engine, and with their game store.
On the mobile front, I'm all for them rocking the boat, even when I find their choices questionable and the comments of their CEO self sabotaging. On the game engine front, I also have no real complaints against them.
Where I tend to take exception to Epic is with their activities promoting their PC game store. I'm all for new competitors, but Epic had really rubbed me the wrong way. In no particular order:
they took pot shots at Valve that didn't really seem fair to me and framed their store as a direct challenge to Steam with misleading statements.
Epic harvests information in a much less transparent way than Steam, and as far as I know, doesn't share that data back out to the community like Valve does.
paid exclusives are anticompetitive. So whatever favor they had from me as a new entrant evaporated when they engaged in that behavior.
Their whole schtick is charging a smaller fee on sales than Steam. But back when steam launched, it was a real decision to publish online or in stores, and 30% was very reasonable. Since then, Valve has continuously added features, added sales tiers, and generally justified that 30% through pro-developer and pro-customer behavior.
Heck, SteamOS is probably driving Linux adoption, and the work that Valve has done there has been put right back into the community for use. Steam even made their steamdeck easier to self repair in their updated version, when it was already the most repairable handheld I've ever purchased.
So if Epic hadn't made their whole PC play center around taking potshots at probably the most pro-customer company in the segment, I'd probably root for them more. As it is, I'm happy to watch and laugh as they roll in the mud with Apple. In this case, I'm rooting for the lawyers billable hours.
Can't argue with that, just Epic can't win me back without releasing a new Unreal Tournament that is essentially UT99 or 2K4 with a fresh coat of paint. The fact that they do anything else is...
Can't argue with that, just Epic can't win me back without releasing a new Unreal Tournament that is essentially UT99 or 2K4 with a fresh coat of paint.
The fact that they do anything else is proof that, despite our former love, we've grown into different people.
From the article alone, it seems Apple is in the right here. Epic agreed to and then broke many agreements before, so why should Apple trust them again?
From the article alone, it seems Apple is in the right here. Epic agreed to and then broke many agreements before, so why should Apple trust them again?
With a good faith reading of what the DMA is really saying, Apple's status as a digital gatekeeper makes it more like the owner of a utility than anything else. In terms of compliance, then, it...
With a good faith reading of what the DMA is really saying, Apple's status as a digital gatekeeper makes it more like the owner of a utility than anything else. In terms of compliance, then, it needs to be "allow first", like utilities.
If someone didn't pay their electric bill before in the past, as long as they're willing to pay now, you can't just deny them service as a utility.
Apple's stance that they don't trust Epic, without really giving them any actionable steps, does not seem adherent to what DMA regulations are trying to do.
Yep, DMA is kinda similar to how some European countries defeated telecom monopolies. We forced infrastructure owners to set up wholesale distribution channels (LLU and WLR are a acronyms I didn't...
Yep, DMA is kinda similar to how some European countries defeated telecom monopolies. We forced infrastructure owners to set up wholesale distribution channels (LLU and WLR are a acronyms I didn't think I'd ever use again) which allowed others to piggyback as equals. I don't think banning competitor from your infrastructure for publically criticizing your policies would fly back then or should fly today.
In this case, can't epic publish their game through a third party app store, which will now be available in the EU, thanks to the DMA? There's also a difference between someone who is unable to...
In this case, can't epic publish their game through a third party app store, which will now be available in the EU, thanks to the DMA?
There's also a difference between someone who is unable to pay and falls behind, but then catches up, and epic intentionally violating a TOS to provoke litigation.
No, Epic is making their own app store to begin with. That's what Apple rejected by deleting the developer account they were going to use. There wouldn't be much point in allowing 3rd party app...
No, Epic is making their own app store to begin with. That's what Apple rejected by deleting the developer account they were going to use.
There wouldn't be much point in allowing 3rd party app stores, if Apple were able to arbitrarily delete them.
I don't follow the EU regulations much, but from what I read, other app stores are already approved with the first to launch tomorrow. So it isn't the case that Apple is blocking all third party...
I don't follow the EU regulations much, but from what I read, other app stores are already approved with the first to launch tomorrow. So it isn't the case that Apple is blocking all third party stores. They are citing a court ruling saying they have the right to terminate relationships with Epic because of their past violations.
Apple seems to be under the impression that they only have to comply with DMA regulation on devices inside the EEA, and that determining whether a device is there is straight forward. I expect...
Apple seems to be under the impression that they only have to comply with DMA regulation on devices inside the EEA, and that determining whether a device is there is straight forward.
I expect them to get sued for that in the near future. Because it isn't straight forward at all.
There's a reason you get cookie banners everywhere, not only when you're inside the EEA.
Not just devices sold in the EEA but also devices operating in the EEA. If you leave that area, you have a grace period before your third party apps and third party app stores stop working.
Not just devices sold in the EEA but also devices operating in the EEA. If you leave that area, you have a grace period before your third party apps and third party app stores stop working.
They aren't a customer though. They're a vendor. So it would be more like cutting off a company that generates electricity for doing it wrong. But analogies are imperfect here. Probably better to...
They aren't a customer though. They're a vendor. So it would be more like cutting off a company that generates electricity for doing it wrong.
But analogies are imperfect here. Probably better to go with the "App Store" metaphor and say it's like Walmart removing a product from their shelves.
My favorite thing is that they're using the ruling from the US lawsuit from Epic, which allowed them to keep their store but couldn't prevent people from linking out, as justification for why they...
My favorite thing is that they're using the ruling from the US lawsuit from Epic, which allowed them to keep their store but couldn't prevent people from linking out, as justification for why they shouldn't let Epic have a store.
I would point at that case and say "That's exactly why we passed the DMA."
NEW: Apple reverses course, unbanning Epic: “Following conversations with Epic, they have committed to follow the rules, including our DMA policies. As a result, Epic Sweden AB has been permitted to re-sign the developer agreement and accepted into the Apple Developer Program.”
Like, I don't like either company involved and all that but I feel this is one of those "Seems obviously retaliatory" situations.
Interesting to see how this plays out.
Epic has actually slowly won me over, over the years. I hate the idea of platform exclusives in general, and loathe the idea of them on PC, so I genuinely despised Epic at first for essentially bribing so many third-party developers to release their games exclusively on Epic Games Store. And I was also extremely skeptical of their far more developer friendly sales fees, and their public statements about wanting to reduce the unfair 20-30% cut being taken by most other digital storefronts. I thought it was all just self-serving PR bullshit.
But after reading about all the shady shit that all the other platforms have been doing over the years, which was revealed during the Epic v Apple and v Google lawsuits, I now feel like Epic might have been genuine in their stated intent all along. I still fucking hate platform exclusives on PC, but I actually admire Epic for its lawsuits against the other platform giants, appreciate them still only taking a 12% cut from developers, and also totally understand now why so many developers have taken Epic's very generous exclusivity deals as well.
For me I compartmentalize Epic based on their actions on Mobile, with their game engine, and with their game store.
On the mobile front, I'm all for them rocking the boat, even when I find their choices questionable and the comments of their CEO self sabotaging. On the game engine front, I also have no real complaints against them.
Where I tend to take exception to Epic is with their activities promoting their PC game store. I'm all for new competitors, but Epic had really rubbed me the wrong way. In no particular order:
Their whole schtick is charging a smaller fee on sales than Steam. But back when steam launched, it was a real decision to publish online or in stores, and 30% was very reasonable. Since then, Valve has continuously added features, added sales tiers, and generally justified that 30% through pro-developer and pro-customer behavior.
Heck, SteamOS is probably driving Linux adoption, and the work that Valve has done there has been put right back into the community for use. Steam even made their steamdeck easier to self repair in their updated version, when it was already the most repairable handheld I've ever purchased.
So if Epic hadn't made their whole PC play center around taking potshots at probably the most pro-customer company in the segment, I'd probably root for them more. As it is, I'm happy to watch and laugh as they roll in the mud with Apple. In this case, I'm rooting for the lawyers billable hours.
Can't argue with that, just Epic can't win me back without releasing a new Unreal Tournament that is essentially UT99 or 2K4 with a fresh coat of paint.
The fact that they do anything else is proof that, despite our former love, we've grown into different people.
From the article alone, it seems Apple is in the right here. Epic agreed to and then broke many agreements before, so why should Apple trust them again?
With a good faith reading of what the DMA is really saying, Apple's status as a digital gatekeeper makes it more like the owner of a utility than anything else. In terms of compliance, then, it needs to be "allow first", like utilities.
If someone didn't pay their electric bill before in the past, as long as they're willing to pay now, you can't just deny them service as a utility.
Apple's stance that they don't trust Epic, without really giving them any actionable steps, does not seem adherent to what DMA regulations are trying to do.
The phrase "malicious compliance" comes to mind.
Yep, DMA is kinda similar to how some European countries defeated telecom monopolies. We forced infrastructure owners to set up wholesale distribution channels (LLU and WLR are a acronyms I didn't think I'd ever use again) which allowed others to piggyback as equals. I don't think banning competitor from your infrastructure for publically criticizing your policies would fly back then or should fly today.
In this case, can't epic publish their game through a third party app store, which will now be available in the EU, thanks to the DMA?
There's also a difference between someone who is unable to pay and falls behind, but then catches up, and epic intentionally violating a TOS to provoke litigation.
No, Epic is making their own app store to begin with. That's what Apple rejected by deleting the developer account they were going to use.
There wouldn't be much point in allowing 3rd party app stores, if Apple were able to arbitrarily delete them.
I don't follow the EU regulations much, but from what I read, other app stores are already approved with the first to launch tomorrow. So it isn't the case that Apple is blocking all third party stores. They are citing a court ruling saying they have the right to terminate relationships with Epic because of their past violations.
Isn’t Apple limiting their DMA compliance to devices sold in Europe? If so Epic will lose out on the other markets.
Apple seems to be under the impression that they only have to comply with DMA regulation on devices inside the EEA, and that determining whether a device is there is straight forward.
I expect them to get sued for that in the near future. Because it isn't straight forward at all.
There's a reason you get cookie banners everywhere, not only when you're inside the EEA.
Not just devices sold in the EEA but also devices operating in the EEA. If you leave that area, you have a grace period before your third party apps and third party app stores stop working.
This was their Sweden account, for creating an app store, so just the EU I think.
They aren't a customer though. They're a vendor. So it would be more like cutting off a company that generates electricity for doing it wrong.
But analogies are imperfect here. Probably better to go with the "App Store" metaphor and say it's like Walmart removing a product from their shelves.
Lil update to this:
EU says it’s investigating why Apple terminated Epic’s developer account
https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/the-eu-says-its-investigating-why-apple-terminated-epics-developer-account/
My favorite thing is that they're using the ruling from the US lawsuit from Epic, which allowed them to keep their store but couldn't prevent people from linking out, as justification for why they shouldn't let Epic have a store.
I would point at that case and say "That's exactly why we passed the DMA."
Another Update:
https://twitter.com/markgurman/status/1766161385774616853