Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Not seen a thread for this
So yeah
GG Tim
Edit - Source
So yeah
GG Tim
Edit - Source
Last edited:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
"potential for serious ramifications for Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft and their video game platforms." says Judge on the Epic vs Apple case
- Thread starter Ass of Can Whooping
- Start date
- News
Thugnificient
Banned
Tim Sweeny is that dumb kid at school who fights over the latest cool toy and gets it banned by the staff.
Edit: Also, link source, please?
Edit: Also, link source, please?
Last edited:
DaleinCalgary
Member
I don't think it matters how much profit is made on the initial hardware purchase for this case. What is going on is maybe Epic is trying to get a ruling that does not include all walled gardens because that might just be business suicide pissing off MS, Sony and Nintendo.
If they win and force all platforms to go to a lesser percentage you might just get dropped for everything you develop by everyone.
If they win and force all platforms to go to a lesser percentage you might just get dropped for everything you develop by everyone.
Portugeezer
Gold Member
$700 console next next-gen 
Piku_Ringo
Banned
dat Sony investment money into Epic doing wonders
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
Apple is gonna win this. I can see no other outcome.
DaleinCalgary
Member
I agree. They have had lawyers prepared for a case like this for years.
Kdad
Member
Microsoft playing both sides of this:
arstechnica.com
Haha bullshit MS...if your console is fundamentally different...so is the iPhone (the only company making the hardware/software end to end with no exceptions....so the iPhone is just as 'fundamentally different' as the consoles'
For clarity: I agree with Apple/Xbox/Sony/Nin...they created the hardware and software experience and should be able to control that access to their clientele.
Microsoft thumbs its nose at Apple with new “app fairness” policy
The software giant has picked a side, and it's with Epic and Spotify.
arstechnica.com
Haha bullshit MS...if your console is fundamentally different...so is the iPhone (the only company making the hardware/software end to end with no exceptions....so the iPhone is just as 'fundamentally different' as the consoles'
For clarity: I agree with Apple/Xbox/Sony/Nin...they created the hardware and software experience and should be able to control that access to their clientele.
Kdad
Member
Then they'd sue for collusion.
Maybe It's Medicine?
Member
Go Tim go! Break the walls down!
vaibhavpisal
Member
Judge would be going crazy on this one.
Epic itself can't make up its mind what it wants.
Epic itself can't make up its mind what it wants.
JimboJones
Member
It would be amazing if Nintendo, Sony and MS where forced to allow third party stores on their devices but I doubt it will ever happen.
Neofire
Member
When has Apple ever lost a case of importance lol
ToadMan
Member
It also helps that Apple is in the right in this case of course.
ToadMan
Member
Well let’s analyze that.
Those console exist at their current Price points because they make money from sales.
For context look at MS latest FY earnings.
They were +1bn from 3rd party software and service sales on Xbox compared to the previous year.
Except they were -34% console hardware sales so the result was only a net +189m. Hardware cost MS about 800m.
Hardware is a cost to drive software sales.
Remove the software sales cut, the hardware is gone in the way we know it now.
Probably double the price of the consoles, probably increase the software prices too, and kiss goodbye to the custom hardware - they’ll be mid spec PC boxes.
Maybe some want it to go that way - streaming content being the only way to access games and you’ll have to subscribe to several different services. It’ll end up costing the consumer more than it does now with each store trying to lock you in.
Last edited:
DaleinCalgary
Member
No developer has the legal right to be allowed on any closed platform they want to be.
They play by the rules or stick with an open platform.
Kdad
Member
I'm not saying they'd win...just that they'd sue...its the Tencent/Epic way of things...
Soodanim
Member
I recently said it in another thread, but I sincerely hope the walled garden stays on consoles. Reason? EA, Ubisoft, Epic, Bethesda, and every other cunt who would happily force people to install shit to play their games. It’s a nuisance on PC, and consoles should be a haven from those practices.
Microsoft playing both sides of this:
Microsoft thumbs its nose at Apple with new “app fairness” policy
The software giant has picked a side, and it's with Epic and Spotify.
Haha bullshit MS...if your console is fundamentally different...so is the iPhone (the only company making the hardware/software end to end with no exceptions....so the iPhone is just as 'fundamentally different' as the consoles'
No, that’s not the point. Console makers don’t make any profit by selling the hardware itself usually, they only make money by selling subscriptions or licensing fees.
It’s not like iPhone, where apple makes tons of money by selling the iPhone itself.
Kdad
Member
Thats a very tenuous distinction...consoles now serve as web browsers, music and video streaming from 3rd parties, social media through facebook/twitter integrations etc etc., they are not single purpose If a company builds the software and the hardware they should be able to restrict access imo...regardless of the functionality of the product.
Kdad
Member
They make 'tons of money' on hardware is a testament to popularity and has zero to do with whether their walled garden is anti competitive. So you think selling hardware at a breakeven or loss is the only reason a walled garden should exist? That makes zero sense.
ToadMan
Member
And that is a problem for console makers.
No one is forcing them to be in the industry or run their operations and make a loss the way they do.
Nintendo makes a profit on its hardware and software. Focus on quality rather trying to kill competition by racing to bottom of the price barrel.
That MS loses money on hardware is because they aren’t good enough to compete with Apple so they’re trying to gain through litigation what they couldn’t through honest competition. The same for Epic.
That is all that is happening here - MS, Epic, Spotify et al want to change the terms of their deal so they can take more of your money off the back of the work Apple has done over 15 years plus.
This case will get thrown out - the court already agreed Apple could suspend fortnite from their App Store so that is an indication Apple are in the right already.
MrS
Banned
4 companies who don't put out any games of importance of worth. There is a very easy solution to this problem: don't play their games.
SoloKingRobert
Banned
Okay, it won't affect those companies since they don't make a profit on console hardware
Last edited:
Kdad
Member
This isn't EPIC the games company....
Additionally, 1 day returns and a stock price in isolation has zero to do with anything when evaluating a company's value.
Last edited:
ToadMan
Member
Last edited:
Bryank75
Banned
Apple is going to crush Epic in court...
If a company produces hardware, they should have control of what software can go on it.... no matter the source. They have no obligation to allow anyone put any software there and it in fact results in very unsafe due to dangerous software / spyware etc.
The result of this.... Apple and Google can block apps / streaming at will for any reason they see fit. Streaming = dead.
Sony and any TV running on Google will be off limits to most streaming services too.
That is what I think will happen. The various layers of tech are too fractured to make cloud / streaming successful and the only answer any of these companies has to that issue is to fracture the games market more, in which case only the consumer loses.
If a company produces hardware, they should have control of what software can go on it.... no matter the source. They have no obligation to allow anyone put any software there and it in fact results in very unsafe due to dangerous software / spyware etc.
The result of this.... Apple and Google can block apps / streaming at will for any reason they see fit. Streaming = dead.
Sony and any TV running on Google will be off limits to most streaming services too.
That is what I think will happen. The various layers of tech are too fractured to make cloud / streaming successful and the only answer any of these companies has to that issue is to fracture the games market more, in which case only the consumer loses.
The Pleasure
Member
Fuck over the unreal engine as a whole and go back to customized engines. Or make a new specialized cryengine. Time to starve the fortnite beast. I'm tired of Tim and his bullshit. Make another UT game you twats.
reinking
Gold Member
Obviously nobody knows how a judge is going to rule but this judge has seen right through Epic's BS and even called them out on in several times in the last hearing. Part of the walled garden statement was pointing out to Epic that walled gardens have existed for 4 decades and she pointed out examples. This judge is very bright and well educated in electronic devices and their digital markets. Epic is not going to be able to confuse this judge with misrepresentations of how these markets work.
thebigmanjosh
Member
I’m sure this has already been mentioned, but the judge is basically saying that whatever decision is made will need to take into account that other companies like Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft could be impacted but shouldn’t be.
Allowing other marketplaces on consoles would not be damaging at all.
Most people would still buy via the official platform holder store and it would help create some much needed competition on price in the digital market place. Right now people are buying digital even when it is massively overpriced compared to retail.
Sony and MS don't pass on any savings to consumers. Digital sales are massively more profitable per unit as there is no production and transport cost and no retailer cut of the sale. Steam has not been hurt by the myriad of key selling websites. The vast majority still buy from the official steam store, even in the sale of exactly identical digital items.
Epic would quickly find most consumers prefer the platform holders payment portal whether it be Apple, Sony or MS. Sadly I don't see them winning they should have planned this out better. We should have competition in the digital space, even on closed platorms.
Most people would still buy via the official platform holder store and it would help create some much needed competition on price in the digital market place. Right now people are buying digital even when it is massively overpriced compared to retail.
Sony and MS don't pass on any savings to consumers. Digital sales are massively more profitable per unit as there is no production and transport cost and no retailer cut of the sale. Steam has not been hurt by the myriad of key selling websites. The vast majority still buy from the official steam store, even in the sale of exactly identical digital items.
Epic would quickly find most consumers prefer the platform holders payment portal whether it be Apple, Sony or MS. Sadly I don't see them winning they should have planned this out better. We should have competition in the digital space, even on closed platorms.
Last edited:
Kdad
Member
You are describing a windows or Linux PC (I'm not including mac as I believe when they go arm they will go walled) or Android platform...you already have this choice.
If you don't appreciate what a closed environment provides you already have open platforms to choose from.
massivekettle
Member
This doesn’t at all indicate that Apple is in the right. This is a temporary measure granted by the judge pending resolution of the case.
The likes of Microsoft, Match (Tinder, Hinge), Spotify, and Tencent (indirectly through its Epic ownership) are throwing their support behind Epic. Whatever is the outcome, it will be appealed and bounced around appeals courts for months if not years.
JimboJones
Member
Sounds hilarious, I'd love for it to happen for the shit show.
SupremeHoodie
Member
Remember, Epic is just fighting this battle for their Chinese overlords Tencent. If Epic wins we’ll see even more Chinese tentacles in our markets. But it looks like Apple has a solid case and Epic look a little ridiculous.
Last edited:
GhostOfTsu
Banned
Consoles would stop existing without the cut for platform holders. AAA would stop existing too. 3rd party publishers won't have anywhere to sell their games. Thousands of people will lose their jobs, studios closure etc.
How is this good for the customers? More competition lol yeah right. Just so you can get Uplay, Origin, Epic, Steam and Bethesda store on PS5? F that.
The court case isn't the final battle, if the democratic pretty wins control of the Senate and Presidency and depending on Warren's position, this shit could get interesting.
Google has basically be forced to allow a browser ballot option in the EU. Regulators across the world are looking at this.
Bryank75
Banned
I still think as long as PlayStation, Xbox and Nintendo offer a physocal option through many game store, they are different to Apple... that is why physical is important for them.
InDaGulag
Member
If I buy a computing device of any kind why can't I install whatever application or program on it? It's my personal property.
I understand companies voiding warranties because of tinkering, being able to curate their own stores, and banning hackers using their online network. But straight up blocking side loading is dumb. All platforms should be as open and free as a computer or at least Android phones.
I understand companies voiding warranties because of tinkering, being able to curate their own stores, and banning hackers using their online network. But straight up blocking side loading is dumb. All platforms should be as open and free as a computer or at least Android phones.
CrysisFreak
Banned
Fuck Epic and fuck socialism lmao.
Bryank75
Banned
When you buy into PC, you know you are getting an open system....
Why limit people to open and fractured systems when one might prefer an integrated system where all the software is designed to work in a synergistic way?
This is actually limiting choice of ecosystem design. It is limiting tech design and possible future innovation through artificial legislative means.
People would choose a PC and android if they wanted open systems.
Last edited:
Yeah, it's another reason to separate them from Apple. I personally hoping for a cabinet with Warren overseeing the FTC.
massivekettle
Member
That is irrelevant though. Apple doesn’t prevent users from signing up to services (like Netflix or Spotify) through other means than an Apple device.
The issue here is about the 30pct cut, and that Apple leverages its position to undermine apps that directly compete with it (eg, Apple Music vs Spotify).
Based on the judge’s comments, it’s clear to me whatever precedent is set with Apple will carry to other walled systems like consoles, whether some here like it or not.
Last edited:
The bundling of an app into the os is quite literally the tent pole of the anti-trust investigation into Microsoft in the 90's. I think you seen Apple's small move into allowing users to change default app as a token gift to regulators but I suspect it won't be enough.