Comments
mil24havoc t1_ix031zd wrote
The reality in which there's not a monopoly abusing it's monopoly status to prevent competitors?
EelTeamNine t1_ix05sit wrote
I don't see the issue still. It isn't negatively impacting consumers, in fact it benefits them imo. Epic, to my knowledge isn't being blocked from developing their own, Google just paid others to not.
The issue would come if they block Epic to make one, if they block downloads of apps from non play store sources, or if they block apps that compete with their own.
I'd love some more phone OS options, which is a slow time coming, but is a much more concerning monopoly than a company preserving the experience of their customers on their own products.
Edit: had Riot on my mind, fixed to Epic
mil24havoc t1_ix07k95 wrote
This is something of a misunderstanding of how monopoly power is abused according to US law, at least. Monopolies aren't illegal. Using your power as a monopoly to maintain your monopoly is illegal. It simply doesn't matter if the other side (Epic, for example) accepts the payout to not open an app store. According to antitrust and monopoly laws, Epic isn't the victim, consumers are. You (the victim) prefer a single app store because it's all you know -- you haven't observed the counterfactual competitive app market and so are unlikely to be able to assess the impact it will have on your experience as a user. Historically, competitive markets have lead to lower prices and greater options for consumers. The alternative (that can also be good for consumers, in certain circumstances) is a single regulated monopoly. Think, for example, power companies. However, what we have now is an unregulated monopoly which exclusively benefits the monopoly holder.
Also, monopolies are market specific - so a market over OSes is different from a market within a given OS (e.g., an app store).
EelTeamNine t1_ix086iv wrote
Good breakdown.
I guess I'm not the affected party of this lawsuit either because I do not spend money on anything in the App store.
n3w4cc01_1nt t1_ix09r5q wrote
tencent is using them as a sockpuppet
randomguyou t1_ix0ah6m wrote
Epic does not do these lawsuits from the generosity of their hearts they want to make their own store and rake in the profits
MyVoiceIsElevating t1_ix0aq59 wrote
CCP knows how to play the long game in economic control and influence.
MyVoiceIsElevating t1_ix0azsb wrote
Android users demand options!
Not sure what this “better experience” thing is?
EelTeamNine t1_ix0bcl2 wrote
I'd be happy if Google would stop altering my phone settings with every fucking update.
The bar is so damn low with smartphones.
EcstaticFlounder24 t1_ix0bnw0 wrote
It will eventually happen, then it will be like streaming with certain apps only on certain platforms.
EelTeamNine t1_ix0buzl wrote
Good thing I use very few apps frequently. The rest I'll probably just drop off that happens.
grby1812 t1_ix0rnj1 wrote
Uhhhhhhhhhhhh...what do you think Google is paying $360m for? It isn't a payment on your behalf to make your life better.
garlicroastedpotato t1_ix0tjgh wrote
The problem with a monopoly is it leads to market dominance which results in degraded customer experience, degraded quality and potentially price increases. There's a few major monopolies that really exercise this point.
With Google Search they're basically the only player out there. Sites are actually programmed now so that only Google and Bing can crawl them (as in search through their content to optimize it for being searched). This prevents are competitors from coming in, but it also means that they're going to be free to cram in as many ads as they can and change the algorithms to focus on sales rather than what the user wants to find. The result is that Google Search is now worse today than it was 10 years ago.
Similarly you have Ticketmaster. It's owned by Live Nation who also own venues, venue rights, talent agencies that organize tours... and also the scalping website. Over the last 50 years Ticketmaster has effectively wiped out all possible competition and locked out competitors from acts that they host. The result of this is that the largest ticket seller in the world can't keep their website online when the largest music star wants to tour.
You don't want 30 app stores on your phone, tablet or computer. But you want THE OPTION. I have like 10 reward programs on my phone, I choose them.... because I use them. But when my local autodealer told me that I was REQUIRED to use their app to even use their service, I just told them sorry not interested.
Epic's lawsuit isn't about forcing you to download their store on your phone, it's about allowing you to have the choice. If you want to play their games on your phone, you can.
Edit: And you already are sort of starting to get a degraded experience on Android and Apple stores as they allow companies to pay them for top spots.
xavis t1_ix0yf5p wrote
Are you trying to say google isn't my friend? Preposterous says I.
dern_the_hermit t1_ix101bo wrote
No but this is a better expenditure of those Fortnite billions than buying up exclusivity, IMO.
Folsomdsf t1_ix11c5f wrote
hand so far up their ass they can taste the remnants of the ccp's breakfast on their fingers.
camposdav t1_ix11fdg wrote
It’s like saying you only want one grocery chain store. They all sell the same items but at least it’s great to have options it makes them all set their prices competitively.
It’s all about options if you like the Google store that’s great but others might not feel the same sentiment you do. So options is always a good thing.
nedrith t1_ix1afhl wrote
Choice. In reality, you'd likely have only one or 2 viable app stores. Most developers won't waste time with 5-10. Most people will choose 1, a small number of people will chose a second one possibly, and very few will use the others. However when Google Bans one app, that developer can go to another store. You might prefer app store #3's interface or they might be better at showing you the content you want to see. Same way a lot of people prefer 3rd party twitter apps for example.
The internet is wide open, yet we only have a few browsers that are really popular. Social media is a bit more diverse yet there are a few programs that are the big ones depending on what type of content you are trying to post.
[deleted] t1_ix1bflz wrote
[deleted]
SUPRVLLAN t1_ix1cu0u wrote
Exactly why they have a big stake in reddit as well.
vorxil t1_ix1dwme wrote
The solution to multiple stores is an open store standard.
Then you just pick an interface that interacts with all the stores.
In fact, you already have the foundation of one. It's called a web browser.
somebrains t1_ix1os60 wrote
I wouldn’t doubt it, but the G branded gaming attempts have been so wildly off the mark I think it’s better for them to just stop
Positronic_Matrix t1_ix1p6gu wrote
> better android experience
It’s like fusion. Always on the horizon but never realized.
bit_pusher t1_ix1px27 wrote
Epic gets a ton of money from developers as well. If you don’t pay millions for Unreal licensing, you pay a percentage of revenue (just like steam) to use it. Small indie development studios will lose over 50% of top line revenue to steam and epic before they even begin paying salaries
SnooSprouts4106 t1_ix1rzcz wrote
Better yet, every large software company will have their own apps store… just like for gaming… Origin, steam, etc… all with notification and geotracking of course :)
nickrweiner t1_ix1rzk4 wrote
And if there’s one thing epic has done for gaming is breaking down the old borders Microsoft and Sony made. Cross play between pc, ps, and xbox was never a standard but epic mad it a standard that most people expect now. Sony was extremely against it until fortnite came to switch and the backlash and probably behind the scene pressure from epic forced there hand and they allowed cross platform for fortnite and epic newly purchased rocket league to be cross platform. This opened the standard of cross play being expected between Xbox and PS
Fit-Satisfaction7831 t1_ix1t1ly wrote
Sure, they want to avoid paying Google and Apple 30% of the transactions on skins.
A bigger question is why should anyone be paying these two companies such ludicrous fees? On the iPhone it costs consumers over a billion dollars a month in hidden platform fees. Disney can't tell you you're paying Apple $40 a year to watch Disney+ if you subscribe through iOS. YouTube can't tell you why their subscription is nearly $5 a month more expensive on iPhone. Apple makes the highest profits in the gaming industry without making any games because of the fees we incur. This is a ridiculous situation where the platforms have declared their service mandatory to extract endless rent for using our own devices.
DotRom t1_ix1zzkw wrote
Also you don't have to install another appstore if you don't want them. EU forced Microsoft to give customer a browser choice screen, most people didn't pick an alternative until a competitive options came into market.
In my view the same will happen to App Stores.
jazir5 t1_ix22a2j wrote
>Epic isn't the victim, consumers are. You (the victim) prefer a single app store because it's all you know -- you haven't observed the counterfactual competitive app market
This is a bad example in this specific instance IMO, because the Epic Games store on PC vs Steam is an extremely comparable situation. Most people very much so dislike Epic Games on PC and it's userbase is much smaller. Competition with Steam has produced absolutely no results, and the prices on Steam are often better than epics. Steam does not base their pricing vs epics, Valve has pretty much ignored Epic since they opened their store.
Now I don't know if the exact same would hold true on mobile, but I really don't see it playing out much differently.
That's not to say they shouldn't be given the chance though. If Epic wants to compete, let them.
Fit-Satisfaction7831 t1_ix240yd wrote
Apple makes in 3 - 7 days what Epic makes in a year, and an estimated $15 - $20 billion of what Apple makes, 10x what Epic makes, comes from the worst gaming and gambling apps that exist.
theDiscreetLurker t1_ix24bs8 wrote
Says the company that buys a ton of exclusives….
mil24havoc t1_ix28che wrote
... Except that you don't know what the situation would be like if Epic wasn't able to open an app store -- because steam didn't prevent them from doing so. I get what you're saying, but the fact that steam has better deals than Epic is fairly weak evidence against a competitive market.
Furthermore, steam never had close to a monopoly like the phone app stores have. Steam has always competed with direct sales, publisher stores, brick and mortar, and the windows store, among others. The fact that one more store didn't make a huge difference isn't surprising because the market was already operating properly.
mrgnarchr t1_ix2awje wrote
Alternatives are good actually
mrgnarchr t1_ix2b4vx wrote
What about a single UI but with user add-able repository and payment connectors.
Like a phone book 😅
aWheatgeMcgee t1_ix2e5m8 wrote
They have other alternatives. They don’t have to go through those stores
Ya’ll can be pissy, but ‘Lest we forget what came first, the App Store or the app… if not for the brilliance of the platforms and the devices, there would be no app. Epic can pound sand, or alternatively. Build their own devices and stores. I dunno why people get all up in arms about this. They are perfectly free to do so.
ThingSuch t1_ix2n0a2 wrote
LMAO, small indie studios would love to have a revenue where they'll have to start paying a cut to epic: the first $1 million is royalty-exempt. If you look at "how much my game made" on youtube, people are not making millions.
Laugherstock t1_ix2pm12 wrote
I feel like Microsoft did all the work and heavy lifting on the cross platform stuff. Not sure how much credit epic should get
ukezi t1_ix2s6or wrote
I bet they will argue that the market is mobile phones and that there is Apple as alternative.
Just like that ISPs are not monopolies apparently even if they divided the markets into regions.
FjorgVanDerPlorg t1_ix31zea wrote
Microsoft has been willing for a long time, because they have the Xbox and PC market, where as Sony just compete with the PS.
Every step of the way Sony has tried to kill xplay and that was the difference that Epic made. When their focus groups started saying that "no Fortnite"/can't play with my friends was a reason kids were choosing Switches and Xbox over a Playstation, that equation changed. In their eyes they were no longer just protecting their walled garden, they were now losing market share over it.
Thatguyonthenet t1_ix35d15 wrote
Don't talk sense in here.
Bright-Ad-4737 t1_ix36p3i wrote
That Activision statement is certainly going to complicate things. For Epic's sake, at least one of those 24 other allegations better be good ones.
Daedelous2k t1_ix3dwsz wrote
Except Steam, amirite.
ihaveblackcats t1_ix3merp wrote
Clearly you don’t have an iPhone because I’m not paying any more than anyone else for any of those services.
bit_pusher t1_ix3o9d9 wrote
>LMAO, small indie studios would love to have revenue where they'll have to start paying a cut to epic: the first $1 million is royalty-exempt. If you look at "how much my game made" on youtube, people are not making millions.
$1M doesn't go nearly as far as you think between salaries, rent, software licensing, art licensing, etc. Yes, for very small studios (sub 5 people) you might squeeze your annual costs below $1M, but once you're above that point GFL.
[deleted] t1_ix3pq1c wrote
[removed]
k0nstantine t1_ix3sx4a wrote
Play Store rival? We're talking about the service that manages 2.5 MILLION different apps, so what new app do they think was gonna happen? This is gonna come out from these dev teams who are a fraction of a fraction of the size who can maybe get a patch or update pushed correctly for their few gaming products, and they will "rival" the app store built in to millions of phones natively? Huh?
[deleted] t1_ix44euc wrote
[deleted]
Iceykitsune2 t1_ix44lax wrote
That's what would happen.
mrgnarchr t1_ix4xxl8 wrote
Why would Steam be an exception? Steam is a good alternative
Daedelous2k t1_ix4yxzy wrote
Epic make deals specifically to stop things appearing on Steam.
mrgnarchr t1_ix51fqc wrote
And that’s bad.
I’m arguing in favour of more competition, not that Epic is unconditionally correct in their actions.
EelTeamNine t1_ix00ch9 wrote
To be fair... I do not want 30 different fucking app stores.
Split profits, don't care, but in what reality would this make for a better android experience?