Fortnite changes payment methods on phones, removed from stores.

[Worgen]

So it sounds like epic decided to just cut out the middle man and allow people to purchase fortnite... currency directly from them instead of having to go through the istore or google play store and because this goes against the liscense agreement, it has been removed from both stores. In response epic has filed suit against both companies, alleging anti-trust violations and anti-competition conduct.

Fortnite Removed From Apple And Google Stores, Epic Taking Both Companies To Court

Following Epic’s release of its own direct payment method for Fortnite on Apple and Android mobile devices this morning, Apple has removed the popular battle royale from its store. In response, Epic has filed a legal injunction against Apple.

kotaku.com

Kind of ironic with how they are kinda trying to do the same thing to the pc market. Although not really since this is business.

 

[Avnger]

So here are my thoughts...

1. Fuck Epic
2. Fuck Apple
3. Fuck Google

As far as the merits of the lawsuit go, Epic has a pretty good argument against Apple. Locking users into only installing apps through the Apple Store has long been a lawsuit waiting to happen. At the same time, Epic's argument against Google is nonsense based on the very same reasoning. Installing apps without using the Google Playstore is as easy as either downloading it from a website or using any of the 3rd party app stores available.

 

[CaitSeith]

Got flashbacks from when Microsoft was sued 20 years ago.

United States v. Microsoft Corp. - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

.

The Court declared that dominance of a market constitutes a monopoly and Microsoft had taken actions to crush threats to its own monopoly.

 

[BrawlMan]

Epic is not the hero they try to claim to be. Epic, Apple, and Google are all one in the same.

 

[meiam]

I mean, apple/google made the OS. That wasn't free and they keep updating the system over the years and run server for it. I don't think it's unfair of them to have some way to monetize the system. The alternative would be for the users to pay a licensing fee (think photoshop) to keep using their phone or charge the maker of the software, and I don't see how that's any better.

I don't really have an horse in this, I have an android but only have it for job interview and will get rid of it asap (I don't understand how people deal with phone, 90+% of call are just spam) and I don't play fortnite, so I don't particularly care about this, but it's interesting nonetheless.

 

[sXeth]

Locking users into only installing apps through the Apple Store has long been a lawsuit waiting to happen. At the same time, Epic's argument against Google is nonsense based on the very same reasoning. Installing apps without using the Google Playstore is as easy as either downloading it from a website or using any of the 3rd party app stores available.

Uh, you can 100% download non-app store apps. Without jailbreaking.
Wouldn't recommend it, in most cases, but its possible.



Going back to Epic's stance, there's a logic to it perhaps. But by the same token, they're going against how every platform they're on works. PSStore, Xbox Live, and Nintendo (if they're on that) all due the same thing.


Some detail is absent here, becuase based on the stance, they should be off of every platform but PC. Not just having it out with Apple and Google.

 

[Avnger]

Uh, you can 100% download non-app store apps. Without jailbreaking.
Wouldn't recommend it, in most cases, but its possible.

Honestly didn't know that; I thought jailbreaking was required. In my defense, last time I used an iPhone was a decade ago.

 

[SilentPony]

Epic is not the hero they try to claim to be. Epic, Apple, and Google are all one in the same.

Jim usually sees things backwards, but on this he's spot on. Epic is no hero and having a trailer for their lawsuit ready to go within 12hours is cynical as fuck.

 

[BrawlMan]

Jim usually sees things backwards, but on this he's spot on. Epic is no hero and having a trailer for their lawsuit ready to go within 12hours is cynical as fuck.

Jim usually doesn't see things backwards. Not unless you're talking about his Destructoid and early Escapist days. I don't always agree with him, but I understand and respect most of his points. I agree though the corporate trailer is cynical as fuck.

 

[SilentPony]

Jim usually doesn't see things backwards. Not unless you're talking about his Destructoid and early Escapist days. I don't always agree with him, but I understand and respect most of his points. I agree though the corporate trailer is cynical as fuck.

Oh no he usually sees things the way they are, just backwards. To him its a hill going down when its really a hill going up. He knows its a hill that's changing elevation, he's just backwards.

But yeah Epic is scummy as fuck in this, and that's saying a lot for Epic.

 

[Bedinsis]

Can't Epic just have two price levels on their in-game prices: one for people who have installed the app via the App store and one for people who have installed it from their store? That way people are incentivised to download from their storefront since they'll have to pay a lower price with no Apple taking a bite of the profit. Or would that not work?

 

[BrawlMan]

Oh no he usually sees things the way they are, just backwards. To him its a hill going down when its really a hill going up. He knows its a hill that's changing elevation, he's just backwards.

But yeah Epic is scummy as fuck in this, and that's saying a lot for Epic.

I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. Just private message me

 

[Worgen]

Oh no he usually sees things the way they are, just backwards. To him its a hill going down when its really a hill going up. He knows its a hill that's changing elevation, he's just backwards.

But yeah Epic is scummy as fuck in this, and that's saying a lot for Epic.

Can you give some examples? I mean, I know hes got kind of a bad take on steam, but what others?

 

[SilentPony]

Can you give some examples? I mean, I know hes got kind of a bad take on steam, but what others?

His take on the whole Spider Man/Avengers/Sony thing. His take is that Sony is removing content from the other games, when the reality is that its adding Spider Man to their version. Sony doesn't owe Microsoft Spider Man in their games any more than Microsoft owes Sony Master Chief in a Souls Calibre game.
So in his world all the versions had Spider Man, and Sony had him removed from non-Sony versions. But Sony just added Spider Man into their version. Same reality, just backwards.

 

[Elvis Starburst]

His take on the whole Spider Man/Avengers/Sony thing. His take is that Sony is removing content from the other games, when the reality is that its adding Spider Man to their version. Sony doesn't owe Microsoft Spider Man in their games any more than Microsoft owes Sony Master Chief in a Souls Calibre game.
So in his world all the versions had Spider Man, and Sony had him removed from non-Sony versions. But Sony just added Spider Man into their version. Same reality, just backwards.

From what I understand, his arguement in situations like this (But maybe not this one in particular) is that all versions should have the same characters/content, without having these exclusive options depending on which console you have, or whichever retailer you buy from. While it might not technically be "removing" the content from another version, it's leaving one version incomplete from what could be a complete package with every character involved in the game/property

 

[SilentPony]

From what I understand, his argument in situations like this (But maybe not this one in particular) is that all versions should have the same characters/content, without having these exclusive options depending on which console you have, or whichever retailer you buy from. While it might not technically be "removing" the content from another version, it's leaving one version incomplete from what could be a complete package with every character involved in the game/property

The problem is that's not how it works in any other industry. If you get a deluxe package on anything, no one thinks you're stealing from the normal package. If you pay for first class seats on a plane, that's not the 'complete' plane experience and everyone else gets the 'incomplete'. You just paid for more and got more. The whole point of competition is to offer a different, hopefully better, product to your competitors. And the gaming industry, as well as every single industry ever of all time, have been doing this since the beginning.

 

[Worgen]

His take on the whole Spider Man/Avengers/Sony thing. His take is that Sony is removing content from the other games, when the reality is that its adding Spider Man to their version. Sony doesn't owe Microsoft Spider Man in their games any more than Microsoft owes Sony Master Chief in a Souls Calibre game.
So in his world all the versions had Spider Man, and Sony had him removed from non-Sony versions. But Sony just added Spider Man into their version. Same reality, just backwards.

Can you link the vid for that, cause I actually don't remember that one.

 

[happyninja42]

The problem is that's not how it works in any other industry. If you get a deluxe package on anything, no one thinks you're stealing from the normal package. If you pay for first class seats on a plane, that's not the 'complete' plane experience and everyone else gets the 'incomplete'. You just paid for more and got more. The whole point of competition is to offer a different, hopefully better, product to your competitors. And the gaming industry, as well as every single industry ever of all time, have been doing this since the beginning.

The difference with the Marvel Spidey thing, is that it's not, as I understand it, a difference in price. It's not "these people are paying more, and thus they get the better game with Spiderman", which is what your "deluxe versus normal example implies. No what's happening is that EVERYONE is paying the same "normal package" price, but those people over there are getting extra stuff for the SAME money you are paying.

So a more accurate comparison is that we all paid for coach seats on a plane, but my coach seat came with a blowjob and free booze, and yours didn't.

 

[BrawlMan]

His take on the whole Spider Man/Avengers/Sony thing. His take is that Sony is removing content from the other games, when the reality is that its adding Spider Man to their version. Sony doesn't owe Microsoft Spider Man in their games any more than Microsoft owes Sony Master Chief in a Souls Calibre game.
So in his world all the versions had Spider Man, and Sony had him removed from non-Sony versions. But Sony just added Spider Man into their version. Same reality, just backwards.

That's it? I agree with Jim. Keef, Pat, and Woolie have made similar or exact points. You should know my stance already on the whole thing with the Avengers game. Check that thread. Ulimate Alliance 3 is a better Avengers game than the Squeenix game. I like you dude, but I am not reitierating the same points I said to CriticalGaming. You can disagree all you want, but I don't give a flying shit.

From what I understand, his arguement in situations like this (But maybe not this one in particular) is that all versions should have the same characters/content, without having these exclusive options depending on which console you have, or whichever retailer you buy from. While it might not technically be "removing" the content from another version, it's leaving one version incomplete from what could be a complete package with every character involved in the game/property

Exactly!

 

[Samtemdo8]

As a person that doesn't play Fortnite or any games on Mobile devices.

Why should this situation with Epic suing Google and Apple concern me?