130
The creator of Fortnite has laid off more than 1,000 staff – despite billions in revenue
(www.theguardian.com)
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Hopefully this will get people to stop pretending Epic is the good guys against Google and Apple.
Android and macOS never stopped Fortnite from running on their platform. Only iOS ever did that, because Epic wanted its virtual currency to be sold directly from them and not give Apple their cut. In and of itself, that is not an unreasonable argument, except Apple is entitled to something considering Fortnite has multiple 10GB+ updates, per user, per week. Multiple. They can't afford that infrastructure, so they have Apple bear the load, but they don't want to pay for it. That's what the App Store fees are for.
On macOS you also have the App Store, but you can also go around it entirely. The Epic Games Launcher works on macOS. However, Epic does not distribute Fortnite through it on macOS because they don't want to pay the server costs of the constant, huge, mandatory updates. They just say it's unavailable. On Android, the Play Store has never been the exclusive app store. You could always just download an app and install it. Recently they warn you it could be harmful, but they still let you do it. Nothing has ever stopped Epic from releasing Fortnite directly on Android, or via the Epic Games Store. Similar to Apple, they just want Google to bear the load.
Yes, they recently settled with Google. Now Google will carry Fortnite in the Play Store and support the updates, which are getting neither smaller nor less frequent, and Google will take less money from selling the Fortnite "V-Bucks" (even though you could always buy them directly from Epic, either on their website or via gift cards sold in stores).
It was never about the V-bucks. Yes, Fortnite makes money from licensing pop culture stuff and selling it to players, but the game's true purpose is to advertise the quality and capability of the Unreal Engine it runs on. If you've never played Fortnite, do yourself a favour and try it out, preferably on a modern console, or a capable PC. The gameplay is at least as good as old Unreal Tournament (which is what it's basically the modern incarnation of), and the graphics are outstanding. Yeah, the culture around the game is juvenile, but if you're good at shooters, you will do okay. I can't love it, I remember when it was a beta, it was a very different animal to what it is now, and I remember YouTubers I still follow raving about how cool Fortnite was. It still has some of those elements, but it's not what was originally promised. In many ways it's more, but I'm not sure all those ways themselves are good.
Anyway, while you can say that Apple and Google are "rent seeking," Epic has always been after free high-demand high uptime web serving. Maybe Apple and Google should have charged less, but Epic was always trying to get something for nothing, and that should be frowned upon as well.
You know who never tried to ask for more? Valve when it sold its Dota Autochess game on iOS and Android. They charged the same rate and ate Apple and Google's 30%.
Well, Valve was running the same business on PC gaming. So how could they not be willing to play by the same rules? Also, I'm betting at that point mobile wasn't taken seriously for gaming. It still isn't. Now we have the iPhone 16 Pro (in MacBook Neo form) running Cyberpunk and a lot of people are looking at it like "phones can play AAA games now?" and it's the astronaut "always has been" meme. The Switch was just a modified Nvidia Shield tablet — the iPhone of the day was more powerful, but it had less RAM. Android caught up to Switch within a year or two. That Tegra chip didn't do anything special. The Switch was just marketed differently. Internally (hardware AND software) it was more alike to Android tablets than people knew.
Maybe none of the 3 are "good guys" and we should be rooting for the fight itself instead?
Yes, I've made that point a few times. ;)
My bad, I probably missed it with my scrolling-ruined attention span.
Except they can afford that infrastructure because you can download Fortnite on Android through their own epic store, but on apple they have no choice but to use the iOS store.
NGL I haven't heard a soul saying Epic is the good guys in any situation involving them. Randy tried to frame the game store as helping devs but a 12% cut for Epic instead of 30% and all the prices were still the same so as a consumer I didn't care... but the PC exclusives thing? Yea deffo didn't spark joy.
Interesting. The Internet's been pretty divided, with a lot of people supporting Epic because they ultimately want to see Apple's control over iOS reduced, and ultimately, so do I. But the fact is, if Apple allowed sideloading like Android did, Epic would still try to force Apple to allow them on the App Store despite breaking the rules because they want Apple to host their app and its updates. Those of us rooting for Epic aren't rooting for Tim Sweeney per se, we're rooting for the change he's bringing.
Your argument would be valid if Apple allowed any other app marketplace on iOS. They force all apps to use their app store. That's the definition of anticompetitive behavior. Apple wants to force everyone to use their app store and get a cut of all their transactions, that's some corporate mafia extortion shit.
Epic sucks, but Apple is/was completely in the wrong there. Google is at least less guilty, as you can still install apps from outside the Google app store on android.
I never said otherwise about iOS. I said macOS lets you install apps outside the App Store.
The question is, did you misunderstand me, or are you intentionally moving the goalposts?
You completely missed the point of the previous comment.
No one exonerated Apple; they just pointed out that there are “no good guys here”
Then you missed the fact that Google is locking down other app stores, but you’re still yelling at Apple for being Apple? Get it together man
I didn't say they were exonerating Apple. I was specifically pointing to their argument regarding Apple bearing the server costs. For macOS, sure, that's valid. But for iOS, Apple is forcing those costs on themselves by keeping a closed system.
Also, Google is not locking down apps from outside the store. I still run the f-droid store just fine. Issuing a warning about installing unknown apps is hardly "locking it down." For people not knowing what they're doing, I think giving them a warning that APKs from third party sources could be dangerous is absolutely fine. That being said, Google could easily create or at least facilitate a APK signing service for third parties so that the warning wouldn't appear for APKs that aren't from shady sites.
I think I just poorly framed and articulated my response. No need to be so hostile and telling me to, "get it together." This is supposed to be a casual discussion, not some heated argument.