Apple Can't Block Epic's Unreal Engine, Rules Judge

Good! Have the stand up to the big bully that is Apple. They like to throw their weight around suing everyone, they even sued a small shop owner who’s logo was a pear along the same style as Apples, only it was just an outline and clearly shaped like a pear and green.. but Apple still sued them.

Hmm, I think this story will run and run, we might have only seen the start of this....

@antdickens Which is how Epic should have handled it instead of pulling a publicity stunt to gather support in the court of public opinion.

If they would have just filed their lawsuit, they could have recouped any commissions they paid to Apple if the court ruled in their favor. Instead, they fired birdshot at a crowd and blamed Apple when other people got hit.

@antdickens hell, I still feel Unreal Engine might be negatively affected by the whole ordeal.

Based on the rulling (actually read the whole thing but thankfully was short) Epic Games and Epic International are separate entities and could be judged independently, with EG breaching contract but not EI. If they both have their own Apple Dev Accounts, it might be hard for Apple to justify killing both. If they both share the same Dev Account, Apple might be able to shut it down at the end of the case if it court rules on Apples favor. Note the rulling is only a temporary restrain until the case is done.

That uncertainty would be enough for me to not even consider picking up Unreal as my engine on a new project I even had remote consideration of eventually migrating to mobile. If I was starting a new mobile game at this point, I would save myself uncertainties and just work with Unity.

@antdickens @Grot I think a lot of people are having a very shallow look at this whole situation. While Epic staged a publicity stunt, they're doing it to bring attention back to a major problem for many developers and companies that deal with the App Store, and that is the overarching anti-competitive behavior that Apple has been displaying recently. Apple undercutting Spotify with Apple music because they nobody to pay a 30% cut to, blocking Microsoft from releasing xCloud to iOS to protect their own Apple Arcade interests and many more instances including with Netflix/TV+ and News+ with news organisations. I don't think Epic went into this thinking "we are going to win a lawsuit about Fortnite", I think they went in with the mindset to provide irrefutable evidence of this behavior and to gain the backing of other companies in similar sticky situations for a Senate investigation. Of course Epic has things to win - if this tips Apple to be forced to allow installs from outside the App Store then Epic stops paying them anything on Fortnite, however it would also give other game developers that opportunity too making it much more feasible to launch on iOS which is pro-consumer. Ultimately this gives Epic more money since they tax large developers (a fairly small fee in comparison) to use the Unreal Engine, but I think their push towards a much lower tax (12%) against game developers on the Epic Games Store shows that they're invested into the longevity and future of the games industry as a whole - which again, is good for consumers.

Yeah, Take that Apple..

@PatDavisGames There’s a lot to unpack and I’ve had this cyclical argument so many times on so many forums. Few points:

• Spotify can subscribe people through their website, like Netflix does. They’re absolutely massive and find it hard to believe they’re disadvantaged significantly by not offering in-app subscriptions.
• xCloud is not blocked because of Apple Arcade. xCloud is blocked because of finicky App Store rules that admittedly need review, but what it comes down to is any IAPs on xCloud games go through Microsoft and not the App Store (other content stores being prohibited from being linked in app). Big difference from Netflix/Hulu/Spotify/other content streamers, as those don’t offer IAPs in the same manner. Could Microsoft work out a deal with publishers to disable IAPs on xCloud games streamed on iOS/iPadOS? I don’t know.
• Launching on the App Store is significantly more feasible than launching as a side-loaded app. I’m not sure how this logic makes any sense at all to anyone who understands business. It’s like setting up a roadside stand to sell your video game instead of putting it in a Best Buy. Why?
• 30% is an absolutely minuscule amount to pay for acquiring a billion potential customers. When I started my business, I spent over 80% of what I made (and a massive chunk of every day) on advertising and “pounding the pavement” to build a customer base. There’s a reason people buy other businesses, rather than start their own in the same industry from scratch. It’s far less than putting your product in a box on a retail shelf, as well.
• Epic is building a cult on a platform of hypocrisy. They claim they want an open market and free choice on one hand, and take away with the other hand. Purchasing rights to games and removing them from competitor’s storefronts (something Tim Sweeney railed against publicly multiple times in the past) is swept under the rug because Epic gives away a bunch of free games - all mental manipulation of the consumer.
• There is something bigger looming here, and that is the Tencent and China connection - they own half of Epic. Is it possible that Tencent is using Epic as a vehicle to try and bypass restrictions on what Chinese companies can do in the United States? Using them to attack American companies in the tech sector as retaliation for restrictions on Chinese companies? Acting like Tencent isn’t a state controlled entity is naive. Getting deeper into conspiracy theory territory with this, but it’s something that should be considered.

At the end of the day, I think there’s a place for a console-like environment in general computing devices. Consoles exist as an option in the gaming space - some prefer those platforms for the same reason people like Apple devices. If you want an open platform, there are other options available. There’s zero reason to take the closed platform away from people who choose it.

What apple is doing with epic, is like the old saying "cut off your nose, to spite your face"

Look I’m just glad for the developers that this would have affected.

The way I see it:

Epic claims they want to open these devices for everyone, by this mainly they mean they want to be able to let consumers install third party app stores, as they can on PC.

In such a world, "everyone" would benefit, but truth is, only those with high marketting power and a hook would ever been able to succeed.

Their end goal, is being able to bring their own Epic Games Store to iPhone and Android (this time, without any security disclaimers.) Even if anyone can theoretically do the same, it would truthfully only be Epic that would have the money and the hook to establish a competing store everyone else would sell through.

@Grot "There is something bigger looming here, and that is the Tencent and China connection - they own half of Epic. Is it possible that Tencent is using Epic as a vehicle to try and bypass restrictions on what Chinese companies can do in the United States? Using them to attack American companies in the tech sector as retaliation for restrictions on Chinese companies? Acting like Tencent isn’t a state controlled entity is naive. Getting deeper into conspiracy theory territory with this, but it’s something that should be considered."

Far too few people seem to be aware of this aspect. It's good to see someone else mention this. All major Chinese business is a functionary wing of the CCP by definition. And Tencent is quite a major business.....and special contractor for the benefit of the CCP and the State (social credit system, covid tracking system, etc, etc.) By all practical metrics, Tencent is part of the government. And holding half of Epic means Epic games is effectively a functionary of the Chinese state. (You could say half - but who has more control between Tim Sweeney and Bejing? )

So, yes, this is absolutely, Tencent and Beijing waging war on Apple.

The only part that makes me uncomfortable in this is that in this case, I think I actually agree with Beijng......

I am no fan of Apple. But the days of when I had to use their products for work are among my worst.

That said, kind of BS that they're saying that Apple, who owns and runs their own platform, can't say what is or isn't allowed on their store. They should be able, if they ever took the whim, remove every app that starts with the letter "A", if they so choose.

@Grot
You have again just looked at it from a shallow surface level just as I said.

• To any regular consumer, if the cost is the same to sign up to the same service on different platforms, the payment breakdown would almost never cross their minds. To them they are paying $10 a month to the service, not $3 to Apple and $7 to the service.
• Apple literally has control of these Terms of Service. You cannot tell me with a straight face that Apple blocking a game streaming service isn't Apple's fault and that it is instead Apple's Terms of Service's fault.
• It's not about side-loading apps, it's about alternative stores. Yes every single developer could sell directly from their own website to iOS users, but much more feasible would be a launcher specifically for Games that can actually maintain enough market share to be worth hosting there. Of course the App Store will always maintain a value, the argument here is not that it doesn't, rather that it shouldn't be the only option for developers. Why can't I publish a game on the App Store and on another alternative store that provides me a much better cut?
• This is one that I see a lot. People think that because Apple sell the iPhone that they should have complete control over everything that everyone should be able to do on it. It's a very strange situation obviously because at what stage does a single company have enough market share to be forced to allow direct competitors access to their tools. This is a very subjective situation that no one person has any good answer to, however from a consumer standpoint competition drives innovation and lower prices so I'm not really seeing why anyone would support their monopoly.
• Yes, they are buying exclusives with lots of money. Maybe this does go against what they previously had said. I understand consumer frustration about this however again ultimately this is a good thing for game developers and for gamers. In reply Valve is taking less of a cut from larger developers which in turn is savings passed on to the consumer (either directly or indirectly).
• Tencent's involvement is difficult and potentially worrying. Ultimately their current stake is 40% and although it does maintain some power on the board, it isn't enough for a proper takeover and the theft of data that you're worried about. Maybe in the future it will be and if your decision is to avoid it for that you are welcome to, but ultimately they are giving developers a much better deal which allows game companies to stay open which is what we all want.

@PatDavisGames You’ve misread and misinterpreted a few things I’ve said, as well as made assumptions I’ve never implied. But, let’s move on from the cyclical conversations.

You’re saying the deeper issue here is anti-competitive practices by Apple. Apple treats their phones and tablets as Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft treat their consoles (Microsoft also treats some of their “general computing devices” this way as well). It’s a closed, controlled ecosystem where everything is run through the platform holder first. Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft have the same rules regarding alternate stores and take the same 30% cut. They also produce their own, exclusive content for their platforms that directly compete with third party developers. They don’t pay the 30% fee for this software, which is the same competitive advantage you claim Apple has unfairly over Spotify. They also license and charge for production of physical media and accessories that are used with their devices.

So why is Apple the problem here? If you absolutely must use an Apple product that has an open platform, they offer a line of desktop and laptop computers to suit your needs. Hell, they give you a built in tool to set up and run a Windows partition on their machine.

I just don’t buy into the “Apple is bad for developers” rhetoric. They do many things that are obtuse and hard to understand - the same can be said for many of these companies. If you think Epic has anyone’s interests but their own in mind (and you can replace Epic with any for-profit organization), you’re very, very naive.

@Grot Again I think you didn't read my previous comment. Of course Epic has Epic in mind as all for profit companies do. The thing about the scope of this is that if Epic gets what Epic wants then it's very possible that all developers will get what they want too. And again as I was saying it's a very strange situation when you produce platforms. Does doing the work to produce the device give you exclusive rights to stop others from using it? Of course it does at the beginning but as a platform grows to be the primary device that more than 1 billion people people use, I think (and anti-competitive laws state) that they no longer have as much control. Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo are of course required to adhere to the same rules if their platforms had the power that Apple does with the iPhone. Comes down to where do you draw the line in the sand as to when your ecosystem is forced to become an open ecosystem by law. As a consumer of entertainment goods I don't understand how you can't see that this is good for you regardless of what you think about Apple.

Whatever for merits of the case I’m glad Apple are giving notice of what they intend to do. In this case the result of giving notice was the bad thing they intended to do didn’t happen.

If Epic had submitted their update to Apple it would’ve been rejected and they could’ve launched their lawsuit based on that without needing to harm consumers in the process.

@Grot No offense, but while I definitely agree with you on the Tencent situation, and also about Epic's motives not being purely for the noble cause (although it's still understandable, seeing as, at the end of the day, they're still a business, wanting to make a profit), I don't agree with the rest at all, and it sounds just a little bit too pro-Apple...

Apple's motives are equally shady, if not more so. Blocking/obstructing xCloud because they won't be able to "quality check", aka brute force control every individual game on the service is total and utter consumer-unfriendly crap, as is blocking newer versions of Unreal Engine, which does indeed hurt a LOT of developers.

And besides, if Apple is supposedly well within their rights to apply these Draconian measures on external services and/or developers and if it's all so normal, then why aren't these things happening on Android as well? Definitely does make Apple stick out like a sore thumb...

@NEStalgia @Grot Here’s an article you should read from years ago now, how game devs are happily mining your data on iOS games and freely selling it around, Apples known about it for years, it’s industry standard in the West, so take your tin foil hat off about Chinese companies eh?

http://toucharcade.com/2015/09/16/we-own-you-confessions-of-a-free-to-play-producer/

What you see Apple tell you and what actually happens in the background are extremely hypocritical and invariably different. Apple is a vicious corporation with a happy smiley face, under Jobs it was a different beast, now under Cook it only cares about shares and profits, mainly because his pay is directly ties to share price he just sold 131 million dollars worth, they don’t care as much about products and are using their market place to abuse others to gain the advantage, the EU will report on this if true and heavily penalise them. The same they did with Microsoft, and they have done with Google. Be a fan of a platform yes but don’t defend it blindly as they couldn’t care less about you at the end of the day. Apple has literally conditioned its fans to believe anything they say and anything they do is great. It’s almost brainwashing in effect. It’s many fan sites are like a meeting area for its share holders defending their every move and decision.

I’m surprised Sony hasn’t stepped into the argument yet, considering its recent 250 million dollar investment into Epic for Unreal Engine 5, which they’ve re-written for the PS5, I presume for exclusive games? Maybe cross platform ones too?

@ThanosReXXX No offense taken at all. People being unable to debate constructively without getting their feelings hurt is ridiculous.

I honestly don’t give two s**** about Apple and they don’t care about me either. I think folks are so caught up in the xCloud thing and an overall “profit is bad” notion that they can’t see the forest for the trees. Not saying you specifically, naturally.

The problem with xCloud is it’s a direct conduit to an outside store (Microsoft Store), which is a violation of App Store rules. There are a lot of reasons for this, most of which is absolutely profit - Apple wants their cut. There are also other issues, like quality control of the user experience and support if something goes wrong.

Here’s the thing though: every single other closed platform operator has the same rules. Android does not operate the same way because Google has built a different, more PC like platform. Apple has the same open platform in macOS. But for their mobile devices, they’ve chosen to operate a console-like experience. Some people like that and seek that, and some people don’t. For those that don’t, just don’t buy an Apple device. Why is that so hard?

@Grot Well, agreed to the latter: if you don't like something, don't buy it, eat it, listen to it, use it and so on, but if any kind of policies or rule sets are hurting existing customers and/or developers, then that IS bad, no matter which way you look at it.

Apple's restrictions may be entirely logical from their point of view, but they factually do prevent xCloud from being able to be offered as it is supposed to work, so that completely defeats the whole purpose of xCloud, so that's VERY counter-productive as well as customer-unfriendly.

So, thanks to Apple's narrow-minded rule set, customers be damned. And I'm betting that there's plenty of Xbox and Apple smart device combo owners that would like to be able to use xCloud as intended...

And the issue with Unreal Engine is potentially even worse, because that will impact both the customers AND the developers.

I also don't believe for a single micro second that Apple is adhering to these practices for platform compliance or quality control. What it actually is, in my view, is trying to keep a stranglehold on software and developers, which just isn't feasible/workable anymore, in today's world.

And as a veteran sales & marketing professional myself, I can definitely also see this becoming something that's eventually going to bite Apple in the you-know-what, because in my personal view, this is also VERY bad marketing on their part.

@ThanosReXXX I see what you’re saying, and agree to an extent. It is a tricky situation that isn’t easy to navigate. Apple can’t just say “you knew what you were buying when you bought our products, deal with it” and they know they can’t do that, hence their vague statements thus far. I don’t think they’re trying to put the squeeze on developers, but I do think they are trying to maintain tight control of their platform. But, this is no different than what Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo do in the gaming space (and Microsoft with some of their computing devices that run Windows 10 S). There is a benefit to that style of platform that many folks (myself included) seek. If I lose that platform in Apple because some people want to blow it up, I have nowhere else to go.

As far as Unreal goes, that is 100% on Epic, and I’ll never waver from that stance. They could have followed protocol, filed their lawsuit INSTEAD of their publicity campaign, and if they won, they would have recouped damages. Instead, they dropped a bomb in the Apple ecosystem with zero regard for the collateral damage, then blame Apple. F*** that, f*** Tim Sweeney, and f*** Epic. Zero regard for anyone other than themselves.

@S1ayeR74 I think you're mis-reading me quite a bit. I'm not even an Apple fan at all. I generally have never been an Apple fan. I've bought some iPod touches before Android phones became stable and I thought the late Steve Jobs era was kind of cool, but that's about as far as i go with Apple.

And I really sit 50/50 between Valley and Beijing in terms of which is more evil and destructive to humanity. Ultimately I place Xi, Cook, Gates, Schmidt, Zuckerberg and friends all in the same pot. And most of them have worked together in terms of the Great Firewall no matter what side they pretend to be on. They are all global hegemonists that are really part of the same cabal that see themselves as the Great Administrators that can guide humanity by simply organizing it like worker bees, managed from a database.

So it's not about "Evil Chinese companies" so much as it's not about "the little games company that made Jazz Jackrabbit versus Big fiendly Apple" - it's about Company operating as a front for the Chinese Communist party and it's collective resources to sink to any agenda of the worlds largest economy on behalf of it's myriad state-corporate interests, versus the world's richest company that spearheads one of the 5 heads of the global tech oligarchy.

I'm in no way defending Apple, but highlight how much more insidious this whole thing is that it's not one company versus Apple, it's realistically a foreign government and it's entire industry using Sweeney's little front as a toy to fight it's battles against their almost equal opponent. Because proxy wars is China's thing.

@Grot While PRoC d.b.a. Tencent d.b.a. Epic Games is certainly a (veiled) juggernaut, it's a little silly to say anyone at all should have filed a suit against the world's wealthiest corporation in the Santa Clara county courts. Apple owns the Santa Clara courts, the Santa Clara Chamber of Commerce, the Santa Clara county judges, politicians, state politicians, and any grand jury in their boarders. There's no such thing as filing a case against such an entity which inherently must be done in their own jurisdiction and actually winning - ever without a movement by the court of public opinion behind you. The legal system doesn't work that way here.

I don't really agree with Epic's motives, but there's also truth to their argument. iOS isn't a closed platform entertainment device. It's a general computing device platform, and the notion that an owner can lock down that platform and leverage a fee against every purchase made through it with no alternative is also damaging. Even if there's no legal precedent to use the courts to halt that monopoly power, because it is their own platform, this makes waves that may make more developers less likely to bother with Apple's platform and tell users "if you want our apps, you're going to need something other than Apple's closed system." Or shake up awareness where developers feel comfortable saying "all our products will be 20% cheaper on every other platform but Apple to cover the Apple Tax." That could shake up popularity and customer demand within Apple. It shifts the problem from being a private war/problem for developers and turn it into a public perception problem that "everything is more expensive on Apple because they charge too much." The long tail effect of making this public, using the most popular game to do it, could lead to changes in Apple's policies based on increasing awareness of what's beyond the curtain and moving the pain to the consumer with a big sign saying "because Apple adds fees."

That's not different from the phsycal sales world. Sure, the most popular, luxurious, biggest mall can charge rediculous tithes. Most shopping centers charge 1-5% of a store's receipts. A big elite premium mall can charge 10-15%. But then those stores are going to have to be premium stores that charge high prices for that luxury and pass it to the consumer. The cost of doing business in premium real estate.

Apple is doing this in the extreme, but gets a pass because the "stores" aren't passing it onto the consumer (yet.) This highlights that issue and may foster passing the buck. If that happens more consumers might decide shopping in the elite mall isn't worth the cost anymore when Android Mall is down the street and is cheaper in most of the stores.... Then Apple may make some changes (or at least not gouge almost a THIRD of the receipts like a Centurion tax collector.)

Also "F*** that, f*** Tim Sweeney, and f*** Epic. Zero regard for anyone other than themselves."

I dunno, but you're channeling your inner Cliffy B. there....

@PatDavisGames
It's not about side-loading apps, it's about alternative stores.

Side-loading on iOS would allow anyone to offer their own separate store.

@ThanosReXXX
And besides, if Apple is supposedly well within their rights to apply these Draconian measures on external services and/or developers and if it's all so normal, then why aren't these things happening on Android as well?

But this stuff does happen on Android too, just at a different scale or form.

Google is also being sued for the same reasons. Google does chose to be a bit more lax in some fronts, but not at all when it comes to gaming and IAP. Even xCloud is limited on Google Play. You must have the version that comes with Samsung phones to get a fully functional version of xCloud (reason I bought, and write this now from, a Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Ultra.)

@NEStalgia It’s cyclical and pointless to continue arguing the merits of the 30% charge on sales through the App Store (total retail percentages are much higher than what you’ve listed, and much higher than the 30% - way more hands in the pot). Some people think it’s too high, some people don’t. Apple didn’t invent the 30% charge, so I’d like to see the same scrutiny brought to others if that’s the angle of attack we’re taking. Apple is a huge company, but the bulk of their revenue is still from devices (services is growing quickly). A quick search shows that Apple made about $15b from sales through the App Store in 2019. Sony made $12.48b through the PlayStation Store in 2019. I dunno, that’s close enough together that they should face the same scrutiny, no?

As far as the Epic/CliffyB/f*** stuff, well, it is what it is. I agree with the judge - Epic brought this on themselves. The Unreal Engine stuff was overblown hyperbole from media outlets anyway. Apple wasn’t “takin away ur gamez” like a lot of irresponsible media reported. And, again, all of this could have been prevented had Epic not used their customers and developers as collateral, regardless of how you feel about the US court system.

@Grot True enough, and mind you: I'm definitely not defending Epic's practices of trying to sneak their 30% rules past Apple's platform restrictions, and as mentioned before, I'm fully aware that they aren't doing this out of any kind of noble general purpose, but I don't think that you'll have anything to worry about, certainly not about the platform blowing up.

If anything, if this goes in favor of Epic, then all it will mean is that Apple will either have to change some of the terms and conditions of their platform, or that they'll have to make some exceptions towards certain services, so that they can work as they are supposed to. Especially in the case of xCloud, it just isn't a realistic stance, much less a workable situation to force Microsoft into allowing Apple to rate/control/check EVERY single game which is available through xCloud.

That's beyond crystal clear to me, so I don't understand why a large company like Apple wouldn't be able to see this, although I bet they actually do, but they just don't want to loosen their reigns. Reaching a nice middle ground would be good, because it would ultimately be beneficial to all parties involved, but it seems like Apple is just digging its heels into the ground, and doesn't want to give an inch.

As for Epic: if things stay as they are, then Apple device-owning console gamers should definitely also blame them for causing problems for other developers that are using Unreal Engine, because it's going to cause a world of hurt for a lot of them, especially the smaller developers. Just imagine not being able to use the latest Unreal Engine on iOS and having to completely retool or downgrade your game to a version of Unreal that actually IS allowed on iOS. If that is even possible at all.

I wouldn't know, since I'm obviously no developer, but this is what I am envisioning as a spectator, as the ultimate result for developers, when the sh** hits the fan, if it hasn't already...

@Tharsman Ah, okay. Didn't know that. Still, it's a LOT more lenient than what Apple is doing, and it isn't hampering or crippling services like xCloud or engines like Unreal, so regardless of this (for me) new information, my views on this remain the same.

@ThanosReXXX You just reminded me of something I forgot to mention as well. When this whole thing started with xCloud, I made a comment on here guaranteeing Apple and Microsoft would work something out. Why? There’s precedent with Amazon and their digital TV/Movie sales and rentals.

As far as the platform blowing up, that’s admittedly some hyperbole of my own. But, if the theoretical Epic iOS store becomes a thing and they start securing iOS exclusives, it will hurt me. Take something like Dead Cells - plays absolutely fantastic on mobile when I have a few minutes to spare. I’d be gutted if that was only available through the theoretical Epic iOS store.

@ThanosReXXX @NEStalgia @Tharsman @PatDavisGames I’m gonna bow out of this topic for now, but I appreciate the level-headed civil debate, regardless of whether we see eye to eye. Thanks!

@Tharsman yes I am aware of this, I was explaining this in direct response to Grot who didn't seem to understand that.

@phantomgrimace Why would it make you happy for Apple to put hundreds of developers out of business? They have nothing to do with this issue.

@Grot You're welcome, and fair enough. I'm relatively sure that things will quiet down eventually, and some kind of agreement will be made, but it's a shame about all the bad publicity for all parties involved.

I'm no Apple user myself, so I won't be affected at all, but I still sympathize with my fellow gamers, so here's to an ultimately positive outcome.

@Grot you must work at apple cause some of your arguments are just dumb techno blable....for instance xbox xcloud is essentially netflix for games...your not buying the games your just playing them like i play netflix or hulu, the only difference is that its more interactive....only reason for apple to block that is apple arcade....sorry but thats the truth to xcloud apple doesnt want competition to apple arcade..

also your 30% comment is just dumb its 30% for the first year cause most of the sales will happen in the first year... and 30% is not miniscule if so how bout you hand me 1$ for evey 3$ you make you make 300 total well give me 100 and you keep 200 thats just insane....