Epic's Nineteen Eighty-Fortnite video is an irresponsible piece of corporate propaganda

Fortnite's operator is demonstrating it's fully prepared to weaponize its young audience of millions for its own monetary gain.

[BrainSyphoned]

Naw Epic just rolls how China rolls. Calling it corporate propaganda is like identifying meth as rock candy.

[rdgneoz3]

"In late 2018, Epic launched its own PC game store with a 88 / 12 revenue split as an attempt to lead the industry toward what Sweeney sees as a more fair arrangement between platform holders and app and game makers."

"Both Apple and Google take only 15 percent if an app maker is primarily selling a subscription service, as Netflix and Spotify do."

Yah, such an evil company that their own game store takes only a 12% cut, compared to 30% on Apple or Google stores (even though they do a 15% cut for Netflix or Spotify)...

https://www.theverge.com/pl...

[ruefrak]

Epic provides a service and they put a percentage on the cost to add profit. The thing is that with PC games, you can go to other stores. The game maker can sell directly to the customer if they want to and cut out the middle man altogether. There is no such option on iOS. You use Apple's App Store, or nothing.

[morganfell]

Well if this turns out to be true Epic may have overplayed their hand: https://twitter.com/Slasher...

[fiveby9]

I don't see how EPIC wins this battle. I think it is unlikely EPIC will dictate through the courts what how Apple runs their store. The outcome makes no difference to me either way but I imagine Apple's legal team will prevail.

[ApocalypseShadow]

Or, Epic can make their own cellphones. Much simpler and they can keep asking for that 12%.

Propaganda tactics to obtain more money for themselves on someone else's products.

Apple should try to put their games on the EGS and not pay Epic. It's only fair. Even make a 1984 video after Epic tries to sue for non payment for using their store.

[rainslacker]

@Morgan

There's a lot going on with this whole thing and it does have a lot of mobile developers worried. Even some major publishers who also produce games for mobile and have been using UE for such a purpose for a while. Unreal was the real first major game engine to truly take advantage of mobile platforms, and it opened the doors for a lot of higher production games for the mobile market.

Epic made the first move, but I fear that Apple is going to an extreme in retaliation. Banning all Unreal projects would be disastrous for a lot of indie studios, and even some major publishers.

These two companies are fighting over which one of them will make more money. Epic is doing it for a good reason, but they're going about it the wrong way, and it could have extremely negative side effects on the industry as a whole. Apple did what was within their policies to cause the whole thing to start, and I'm sure Epic knew it was going to happen. But this whole thing is going to get worse before it gets better.

Someone said when this all started that when two big companies fight, the consumer loses...or something in that vein. In this case, it could also mean quite a few developers lose, as well as companies that make supporting products to help those developers and utilize the Unreal Engine.

Epic wants to effect change. Apple wants to protect it's interests. The consumer and developers are left in the middle, and while what Apple is doing is well within their rights, and they will win any court case, it's only going to get worse before it gets better. Right now Epic is hoping that public pressure will change Apple's policy, but I think they're banking too much on Apple caring about what the public thinks about them. Apple really only cares about appearing like they care about the customer, not actually caring about them.

[morganfell]

@rain,

Great write up, especially remarks about who ultimately pays. But let’s also state that Epic only cares about their own interests as well. Tim Sweeney pretending to look after gamers is the height of hypocrisy. After all this is a business that built a game store for companies, not for consumers. This is a company that has only done that with which they could get away and features such as refunds were only installed after livid public reaction. Holding games hostage is not in the consumer’s best interest.

Epic can cry about developers if they wish but you know what? I do not care. It isn’t my place to be concerned about developers or publishers. I am going to consider the consumer first. After all when these developers lie to gamers and at the last minute reverse course and flip stores they aren’t thinking about the average buyer. And to further show my honesty doesn’t involve any altruism, one of these entities is partnered with a company hell bent on swallowing gaming and manipulating public opinion on a global scale and one of these companies is not. One of these companies is fairly adamant about their consumer’s privacy and one of these companies is partially owned by an entity that pushes social scores to determine your rights. One of these companies negatively and directly impacts the gaming about which I personally care and one does not.

[Oxen21]

And what is that 12% good for? The games still cost $59.99! It isnt cheaper than steam.

[rainslacker]

@Morgan

While epic certainly has their own interest here, I have to say that epic has a long history of fighting these kinds of fights for the industry, and the consumer. Sometimes I feel that they take on things that they shouldn't, nor do I agree with everything they've done, or felt it required the kinds of crusades they've brought, but overall, epic has generally always done things they feel benefit the industry as a whole.

I dont want to get into a discussion on if singular instances were the right thing to do, just pointing out that they themselves feel it is the right thing, and I'd wager we could find people relevant to the situation...as in not forum analysts...who feel the same. Even here, there are a lot of people in the industry who support what epic is trying to do, but I think many are worried at how quickly it escalated.

Its not that they wont ignore things they may fight for if its beneficial for only them, just more a general culture of what they outwardly stand for.

I'm not against Epics goals here, because if they succeed, it has wide reaching implications for the betterment of the overall industry. Im not against apple either, because they make clear what you are allowed to do, and you can agree or not. I've had success with games on iOS and android, but I could have had more with a larger revenue cut in my favor. But I knew what I agreed to, and my project was based on that.

I'm not for the way that epic has brought this about, and now I'm not too keen on the threats that apple is making which could have a serious impact on devs if they actually stop all dev support for the unreal engine itself.

[RazzerRedux]

One might say Apple's 1984 video back in 1984 was an "irresponsible piece of corporate propaganda". Apple painted IBM as being some technological tyrant just because they were IBM.

[ruefrak]

My problem was that the article says the original ad was to sell a computer. No, it wasn't. It was to sell an idea. It wanted to sell you on the idea that Apple was the rebel and the free-thinker. It's the same as the Think Different commercials. The fact they were selling a computer was secondary.

[kneon]

And they have become exactly what they claimed they were not back in 84.

[Loktai]

Drinking the koolaid I see....

Dude it was an ad for a computer.
There was no IBM monopoly they just needed a dragon to slay.

You had Atari and Commodore and others making machines and in fact companies were allowed to make clones , as well as IBM not dictating what OS you ran ... You could write or buy whatever environment you wanted. Did apple allow you to run macos on an IBM? No..... They didn't. They sell their system with their software the boot loader only loads their OS ... It wasn't for many many years that Apple users got alternative OS options . Basically apple was selling you equivalent of what the iPhone is. Their box with their software and you will use it on their terms.

[TheProfessional]

You're beyond naïve if you think anything other than sales was the real reason they made that commercial. Selling the idea is worthless, all that matters is how many computers are sold as a result. I'm sure the Apple marketing execs were all sitting around saying "as long as they get the idea!"

[frostypants]

To be fair, IBM really is a soulless, awful organization. There's a reason why Jobs and Gates left them in the PC/PC software market dust in the 80s.

[gamer7804]

" weaponize its young audience of millions for its own monetary gain." isn't this what all toy commercials do, lol

[Software_Lover]

Everyone is so damn dramatic these days.

[RgR]

Dont be so dramatic :P

[calactyte]

I've read through this write up more than once and right now I can't see anything but the writer defending Apple. The remarks about Gamer Gate and the political implications behind supporting I guess Democrats (for larger government control) and Republicans (for less government control) are actually pretty humorous to me. Which is it? Are Epic proselytizing to an audience incapable of making meaningful change? Or are gamers who play Fortnite (btw totally not just young children) powerful and capable of making change such that there is concern over those old enough to influence the coming presidential election?

Of course two giant corporations fighting each other means whatever they say is propaganda and also water is wet. But I do think it's important to note, one of these giant corporations is seeking a change that also benefits the little guys as an ancillary benefit. Also Apple ironically has become today's version of IBM. I don't care if this particular writer believes only kids play Fortnite, that's frankly an out of touch assertion on her part. I think turning their own award winning ad campaign against them is obviously premeditated but also brilliant.

You see the whole unsaid part of all this is some Apps get to circumvent Apple's rules such as Netflix while others like Fortnite does not. Why? Because Apple is pushing Apple Arcade. So Epic is saying "oh you want to capture the hearts and minds of gamers Apple? OK well let's make you the bad guy. I love it.

Epic is practicing what they are preaching here as well since games that are on Epic Games Store don't force a particular payment system. “We do not force developers using our store to use our payment ecosystem,” -Tim Sweeny says.

TLDR; The writer is an obvious SJW worried about political implications of pointing out that Apple is giant anti competitive corporation. I find it hilarious at the amount of hand wringing going on here when a company like Epic politicizes gaming but threatens the writer's views so now it's propaganda. However when everyone else logs into COD we need to read BLM statements. Or we have to be concerned with how Transgendered people are portrayed in games like Cyberpunk or (going way back), we have to worry about Resident Evil 4 being racist. Oh and you're obviously anti-gay if you thought Last of Us 2 was written like absolute trash.

[BlackTar187]

You should know you're the baddie when you pick apple to stick up for. Apple is a dirty human rights violating POS and the amount of fanboys who stick up for them because muh iphone,ipad whatever is pathetic.

People are robots now.

[RazzerRedux]

"You just assumed our gender?"

lol......was that a sarcastic joke? I hope that was a sarcastic joke.

[morganfell]

Just curious but how is Apple violating human rights?

[ChristopherJack]

Is water wet though? I mean, it certainly makes things wet. What is wetness? Being covered by liquid I suppose, does water cover itself? I need more time to reflect on this.

[starchild]

Bravo! You summed it up perfectly. I was planning to write a comment with a lot of similar observations but you did it perfectly so I don't have to.

[TheProfessional]

Well said man, couldn't agree more. It is a complete joke that any legitimate criticisms are just immediately written off now. Anyone who criticizes something is instantly labeled as a "hater" or a bigot/racist/sexist/misogynist /chauvinist, etc. Unless you criticize someone white and male and then you can say whatever you want.

SJWs, virtue signaling and rampant hypocrisy on key issues are all ruining movies and games. It was much better when Resident Evil 5 was the ONLY game being criticized for "being racist" and everyone knew it was B.S. because the game was set in Africa ffs.

And I agree about Last of Us 2, the writing for the secondary characters especially was awful. Why care about any of them? EVERY side character in the first game was more interesting. So let's spend hours walking around with Deena, Lev and Mel as they have trivial, pointless conversations. Deena said she used to go to the synagogue! Lev doesn't know what a quarter is and barely speaks! That's character development guys! So deep!

So much of that campaign could have been cut, yeah search around for two hours to find a gas can to open a gate. That's essential for the story for sure! And that ending....the less said about that the better.

[RememberThe357]

Yeah and Apple just kicked them right in the nuts. How is Epic gonna go and ask for a fight with Apple then act like a victim after getting rocked? FK Epic for this buffoonery. And FK Fortnite just because lol.

[BlackTar187]

Fk apple

[RememberThe357]

Fk both these companies. But Epic started this shit then ran to the courts when it got real. At least Apple didn't back down.

[rainslacker]

I'm fairly confident Epic fully expected this to happen, and I'm fairly confident that they were definately going to go to court about it....or at least go through the motions in an attempt to shape public opinion in a way that would put pressure on Apple to have more agreeable policies.

But as it is, I think most people, if not the extreme vast majority, actually have no idea what Epic is trying to achieve here, or why they should care....and I question if we as consumers really need to care that much.

As someone who has published games on mobile, I believe in what Epic is trying to achieve, because I fully understand how these stores effect the profitability of a project, while not offering much in return for what they take. But, I also think that it's escalated extremely quickly, and that Epic maybe assumed too much based on their status as the predominate engine maker in the industry. I don't think Apple will deny Unreal Engine games on their system out of hand, although I said last week that they could just do that if they wanted to, although that's getting into anti-competative territory. But, I do think that if Apple pulls support to certain things that Unreal relies on to make it work well on iOS, then it will pretty much mean that any new technologies will be under utilized as Epic tries to find workarounds, which will only slow overall development.

As it stands, Epic needs Apple's cooporation more than Apple needs Epic. While UE is one of the best engines on any mobile platform, it isn't the only one available. Many publishers and mobile developers have come to rely on it, and if Apple pulls the plug on it, then it will mean a lot of losses for current projects, and likely the shuttering of some studios with no way to recoup their losses, meaning they lose whatever they may have created to the investors.

[calactyte]

It'll get settled in court. I'd say Epic games is winning in the court of public opinion. When folks can't play Fortnite on Apple's products anymore its bad for both Epic and Apple.

Wait until Google Play store works a deal out with Epic to get the game back on Android platforms, then Apple will really look bad unless they negotiate a similar deal.

[rainslacker]

Except Epic is trying to force a bigger change than just them making more money. What they're doing is more about a principal which is affecting the entire industry, and that's not a bad thing to those who are in the industry and haven't been able to make those changes on their own.

Epic has a lot of influence in the industry, and they can effect change. But in this case, I feel they're trying to effect change in the wrong way, and haven't been that clear about what they're trying to do with the public, and instead are trying to rally people to their side without those people actually trying to understand what's happening. This isn't actually about Epic getting a bigger cut for their games on the platform. This is about the developers and publishers who put so much time and money into these productions getting a bigger cut.

To me, that is reasonable, because the amount that all these platforms take is absurdly high, and outside of some anecdotal instances, they do absolutely nothing to promote or help cultivate the sales of these games. Less than a tenth of a percent ever make it up into some more high profile discovery area, and the stores are basically just hosting platforms to download the content from.

What's not reasonable is the way Epic is going about it, and some other recent events have made this escalate to something that could potentially be extremely bad for a lot of mobile developers to the point where they may end up having to cancel projects, which will effect their investment money, which will effect their resources to continue the project, or even remain open. Epic in trying to do the right thing has possibly made an enemy of those they're actually trying to do something good for.

Hopefully things get settled so there isn't so much concern within the industry about it, but I have this feeling that it's going to get worse before it gets better.

[ChristopherJack]

You sound like a vindictive 12 year old incapable of comprehending anything beyond ABC logic.

It's not a boxing match & if you knew the first thing about antitrust law, you'd know that Epic's claims are potentially credible.

When monopolies & duopolies form, ABC logic no longer applies to them, they aren't individual people but mega organisations with an imbalance of power & influence, governments will frequently intervene if they believe it to be anti-competitive, anti-consumer or that it is stifling innovation. Look up United States v Microsoft.

[RememberThe357]

Bu... Bu... But Epic might be potentially credible!

My moma always told me I should be an expert in antitrust law. I never listened...

But since you're the expert around here, what makes Apple a literal monopoly in the same vein of a Microsoft in the 90s or StandardOil?

[ChristopherJack]

That's for the courts to decide whether iOS is large enough that it presents its own unique market- or whether it's just part of the larger mobile market with Android- in which case it's still a clear Duopoly with price fixing involved.

[RememberThe357]

It's sure gonna be fun to watch. I have a feeling it won't go anywhere and they'll settle out of court.

But let me say this, y'all are taking this a bit more seriously than I am. If some how epic pulls of this sort of coup, and all the platform holders lower their percentages (I just doubt this so much) then all that happens is publishers make more money. There's no guarantee that the actual artists will benefit at all. Epic is a shark biting a shark, they're not the "good guys," they never have been.

[rainslacker]

How exactly are Epic's claims of anti-trust credible?

MS case is different as MS was withholding API level support to competing products, as well as stipulating with OEM manufacturers about what they were allowed and not allowed to install with Windows installs. Apple isn't competing with Epic as a engine maker. Apple's storefront is not in direct competition with Epic's own store, and fortnite is a product sold on the store, not a comparative product subject to anti-trust. Epic wanting a larger cut than Apple provides based on it's policies, and Apple saying, "nope", is not a matter of anti-trust.

At this point, it's not on Epic to claim anti-trust, as that's something higher powers have to decide. If and when the higher powers decide that what Apple is doing is anti-trust, then Epic can sue for compensation under said laws.

Epic breached a contract. One they agreed to. That is not anti-trust, and no amount of law says that companies, or people, can just make up their own laws based on principal....regardless of how noble those principals may be.

@357

"I have a feeling it won't go anywhere and they'll settle out of court."

I wouldn't assume that at all. We're talking about two extremely litigious companies that love to go go court over matters of principal, or to build their own influence....or both.

Two companies with more than enough money to spare to fight it out for years over something that probably seems mundane to the average person

My personal opinion is that Epic is trying to influence public opinion, which will in turn apply pressure on Apple, and probably Google, to change their policies about such things. I think it may not happen, as neither Google or Apple really care what the public thinks, and it would take more than just losing fortnite for both those companies to change the policies in question because they'd lose a lot more in the long run than whatever revenue they make from Fortnite.

There's a lot of game industry politics going on here, most of which people aren't that aware of even when things are going well. Unfortunately for Epic, neither Apple nor Google are gaming companies, nor do they derive most of their income form the industry.

I'll also make a point that below you said they're just as money hungry. While I agree to a point, the point of what Epic is doing is about the whole industry, not just them, and many in the industry understand this. Pretty much the same reason they made the EGS. There's a lot here that people don't realize what all is going on.

[RememberThe357]

@Rain
I always appreciate your responses. I suppose the way I see it Epic isn't doing this for the industry the same way Walmart didn't lower prices to help the grocery industry. It's a game to gain market share then raise prices back up when competition has dwindled. This all just feels like a big game, and one Epic didn't realize was going to hurt this much.

I really do hope that I'm wrong and the industry gets a bit more equitable, but I also don't know that the current system is actually broken. Do platform holders actually deserve the cut they take? How big are their investment into their platform? Is it better for a user to be on a cheaper platform with let's say, weaker security systems in place? Or a system that's unstable? I just don't know enough about any of this to go anywhere deeper than broad generalizations.

[rainslacker]

Epic benefits from this if they come out victorious. That can not be denied.

But the whole industry will also come out ahead.

Yes, are face value, it does just seem like epic wants a bigger cut...and I'm sure they do. But so does the whole industry.

Epic, in it's time, has also charged pretty high licensing fees for its engine. They arent innocent in profiting heavily off the work of others. Some licenses would take 50% of all gross revenue of any game published using UE. But they adjusted that to something more reasonable.

The way things are now in the industry, particularly with indie devs, is that they make less for their work than all the other parties involved. There are store front cuts, engine licensing cuts, sometimes platform cuts, and depending on the situation, publisher cuts.

A dev can have a highly successful game, but may not make a dime in return of their investment. Thats just wrong and exploitative, and a problem with the whole industry. Obviously this whole thing isnt addressing all these issues, and I question if the industry is going to turn this back around on itself, but at least it's a start, and perhaps more people can see just how little these devs are making for years of work.

[MTVBG]

(deleted)
please let me actually delete comments N4G, pretty please

[L7CHAPEL]

apple has become a corporation of greedy controlling assholes since Steve Jobs passing, Tim Cook is one of the worst.
he takes corporate greed to a new level.
it's about time somebody challenged both apple and Google's app store policies, because it's well beyond a Fair trade/Fair commerce issue at this point.
it's absolutely ridiculous.
Google needs to focus on security above all Else, because theirs is a complete joke.

[ChristopherJack]

Wasn't Steve Jobs a notoriously greedy, controlling arsehole?

[L7CHAPEL]

not towards his customers, certainly not on the level of Tim Cook.

[RazzerRedux]

"certainly not on the level of Tim Cook"

How so? Cook is simply continuing the foundation that Jobs built. I don't see him any more or less "greedy" than his predecessor.

[enkiduxiv]

Removing usb ports and then selling expensive adapters so you can use your usb drive was the last straw for me. I went PC this time around and I absolutely hate Microsoft. Enough said.

[1nsomniac]

What people don’t understand because they’re too immature to comprehend and think for themselves. Is that Epic are the good guys here!

The hypocrisy in this instance is off the scale and people are still to stupid to see it.

[RememberThe357]

What hypocrisy? By who? What does maturity have to do with comprehension? Why do I care what you think? 😂

[starchild]

I don't know enough about Epic yet to be able to say if they're one of the good guys, but I do know that Google, Apple and the writer of this article are the bad guys.

[RememberThe357]

I've been a bit pokey in this thread but honest question, not trying to argue at all. What makes those companies bad guys? I don't read too much into the phone world.

[CBaoth]

Are Apple and Google bad? Yep. Is Epic the saint then? Must be according the context people have attached to this issue. Hilarious that people have painted them as underdogs fighting for consumers' rights against evil corporations when money and monopoly are two of Tim Sweeney's favorite words. Are we going to sing the same tune when Epic does the same thing to MS? Guess Sony opted to pay upfront and let China, err TenCent's pit bull attack other companies.

[1nsomniac]

The reply’s are my point exactly, a population of naive people who are too lazy 2 spend just what surely couldn’t amount to more than 10 mins doing research.

[Christopher]

There are no good guys here.

Epic is doing this for increased profits, not to save their users any money. Their prices for in-game money is based on what they think people will spend on it, not based on that + Apple's 30%. Remove Apple and Epic would charge the same.

Apple has the policy to make money off of others, but you can't ignore that their investment in hardware, OS, and marketing that closed market so that Epic has that audience in the first place shouldn't just come for free.

[ChristopherJack]

Of course it's propaganda, as was the original commercial that it was mocking. All commercials in general have an agenda.

[anast]

We got a die hard apple fanboy/girl with this one.

[Sciurus_vulgaris]

Some people are trying to paint Epic as a good guy? But are they actually pushing for Apple and Google to decrease they sales cut on the store? Or is Epic just trying to further enfranchise themselves by making Fortnite even more profitable on mobile devices?

Why didn’t Epic try the same stunt consoles which also take a cut from store sales of ~ 30%? Had Epic tried to pull the same stunt on the PlayStation, Xbox or Nintendo online stores, the previously mentioned companies would respond just as Apple and Nintendo did. If Fortnite was blocked on consoles kid would quickly jump ship to other games, mainly: COD Warzone, Apex, Roblox and Minecraft and Fortnite’s revenue would plummet.

[rainslacker]

The policies in question have wide reaching effects on the entire industry. In the past couple years, and really even before that, Epic has often fought the good fight on behalf of those in the industry which were affected by some of the negative things that happen within. Tim Sweeny is actually quite outspoken about a lot of this stuff, and they've often exerted their influence to try and exert change.

it doesn't mean that Epic doesn't do everything they can to also make as much money as possible, and it can be argued that some of their older licensing models were not that great for the average indie developer. Epic isn't perfect by any means, and they are certainly about making as much money as possible. But it isn't the only thing they are.

Is Epic the good guy? It depends on who you ask. For the consumer right now, this isn't an issue for them to have to place a good vs bad judgement on. This really has nothing to do with the consumer, although it will probably effect them if some potential outcomes come about. This is about the industry itself, and more so, the amount of money that these storefronts are taking for essentially offering a hosting service. While this hosting service is great, and offers something convenient that the customers are more confident in using, the question is, is the amount they take fair considering what little they do to actually sell the products. What they do to help sell these products, or how little, is a whole other debate, and can be had in many places that deal with such things.

There is nothing that states that Epic wouldn't try this with the console makers, but right now, the mobile platforms are an easier target. Epic has to be careful as they are still the predominate engine provider for thousands of devs on console and PC, and disrupting the console portion of those developers projects would not bode well for them and would quickly turn the industry against them. This is because the individual publishers can take that fight to the console makers, and have in the past. But places like Steam, and the mobile market have been increasing their restrictions, while upping their take, while offering little in return. Epic went after Steam first, because it was a platform they could tackle without disrupting everything. But mobile is a closed platform, so disruption had to happen. Console's are also closed, but if Epic thinks that needs to change, I think they may feel they are influential enough to try.

I do agree with what Epic is trying to do here. I was fine with how they did it with Steam on PC. I haven't been impressed with how they did it on mobile, because I felt they tried too quickly, in a way they knew how it would turn out. I don't think Apple is the good guy here, but I respect that they are within their rights to do what they're doing, as Epic broke a contract, and Apple is under no obligation to support Epic. With mobile though, as much as I agree with what Epic is trying to do, I can't condone the way they're doing it, and even more, I can't condone the pettiness and inciteful way they're trying to play this out in the court of public opinion. I won't go so far as to say it was irresponsible like this article, but it was distasteful, and doesn't tell the whole story. More so, Epic is trying to make itself look good with the consumer with stuff like this, while the consumer really doesn't seem to understand what's at stake here....so things like this commercial seem distasteful and obfuscate a very important matter within the industry itself.

[JesusBuiltmyHotrod]

Epic is garbage, none of these corps are your friend.

[got_dam]

Epic violated ToS. Pretty simple really. They had that video ready to go already. They knew what they were doing.

[justsomeoffdude]

hmm. i wonder how much of an i-sheep the author of the article is? She should GTFO with this nonsense

[mixelon]

Let them fight. Megacorps are on our side so much as they can extract money from us.

In this particular case I'd technically be on Apple's "side". You don't pull shit like this. You signed the ToS. You're a developer. You make an engine used by thousands (tens of thousands?) you have to act with more professionalism than weaponising children to get more $$ from Apple and risk throwing everyone under the bus. Hugely irresponsible and petty. It's not like Apple's store policies are new, or a surprise to anyone.

The fact that there aren't alternative stores for IOS is not one of its weaknesses to the majority of it's userbase, it's one of the product's defining features. Apple should be able to do that, there are other phones available with more open platforms. I *personally* would like a more open iOS but it's not about what random tech nerds want.

Google kicked Fortnite off the Play Store too. Everyone has rules, damnit. The platform holders promote the games, host the files, make it easy for everyone to install them. Epic are just trying to strong-arm their way into being able to roll out the Epic Store to iOS in the long run, using Fortnite as leverage. It's skeezy as feck, but as I don't really care about Fortnite, entertaining at least?

[S2Killinit]

Epic is chinese owned yes?

[gleepot]

Epic deserves to be put in their place.

[SpineSaw]

First off as I don't play Fortnite (never) or game on the Epic store nor do I game on the Apple store and although I do have a current Google Stadia sub I rarely use it so Apple and Google going to war and giving Epic the middle finger is not something that I care at all how it unfolds. What I find amusing is how Epic seems to be in the wrong (at least as far as this video goes) here some how or at least that how it seems. The amusing part for me is how not a week ago it was Apple giving Microsoft The middle finger and you could hear to cry of how anti-consumer Apple was being by not allowing Xbox Game Pass on their platform. Again I really don't care but it's Apple and Google's platform and they should be able to do with it what they want to include moving the goal post as needed. Just my opinion it has no effect on me but I do get and understand if your a fan of Fortnite and you played through Apple or Google it surely kinda sucks for you so good luck with that if your in that boat.

[CrimsonWing69]

So, when Apple did it, it wasn't?