Epic Games CEO admits Apple’s 30% App Store cut is similar to consoles

In Day Two, ‌Epic Games‌ CEO Tim Sweeney continued his testimony in Epic Games v. Apple, confirming that Apple’s 30 percent cut is also the “most prevalent rate” that other platforms charge.

Apple's App Store on iPhone
Apple’s App Store on iPhone

Juli Clover for MacRumors:

Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo all take a 30 percent cut from ‌Epic Games‌ on their platforms and require their in-app purchase systems to be used, but Sweeney said that Epic is not challenging them because he believes in the idea of “subsidized hardware,” though he also admitted that ‌iPhone‌ and iOS development is “very similar.”

Sweeney confirmed that ‌Epic Games‌ has a history of bullying platform makers. ‌Epic Games‌ pushed Sony into allowing cross-platform play, but Sony ultimately got the upper hand and requires additional payment to enable cross-platform capabilities, unlike iOS, where cross-platform play is free and has been since Fortnite launched on the App Store.

Apple pointed out ‌Epic Games‌’ use of Apple’s Metal API and shared correspondence where Sweeney and Epic had praised Metal in the past as evidence that Epic benefits from Apple’s APIs and SDKs.

MacDailyNews Take: Smirk.

Epic Games inexplicably wants all of the benefits afforded by Apple’s App Store for free.

By the way, how much did it cost developers to have their applications burned onto CDs, boxed, shipped, and displayed on store shelves prior to Apple remaking the world for the better for umpteenth time?

10 Comments

    1. Their entire case is that Apple is using its “monopoly” position to coerce the payment of higher-than-free-market fees. Now their CEO has testified that the 30% Apple charges IS the free market price. Unless there is more testimony we aren’t hearing, this case sounds ripe for a directed verdict.

  1. Even if “Everyone else is doing it”, that doesn’t necessarily mean it is okay or isn’t hurting the consumer. A tour of the Louvre Museum would fail Apple’s content control. And I can’t help noticing that the App Store lacks any programs capable of making even a simple 3D film. (The first app that comes up for “3d graphics” is discontinued.)

    1. It almost sounds like you were about to make a point, but then got bored. Were you suggesting that Apple has banned 3D apps (which by the way would be useless because the iPad has such low storage limits)? And are you under the assumption that you Apple would block an app that guides a tour of the Louvre? like, for example, “Louvre HD” or the official “Musee du Louvre” app or “Louvre Museum Visitor Guide” or Louvre Visit & Guide,” or all the others? I mean, because all of that is patently untrue. Or were you just typing stuff?

      1. It’s not whether Apple would or would not ban any given app. It’s that they can. That should be limited to their store and not the entire platform.

        They don’t own the entire platform. Users own the devices, developers own the applications, Apple owns the store and has licensed a copy of the OS to the user.

        Just because it’s “The Queen’s English” does not mean she can censor us.

  2. I’m beginning to think that Epic does not and has never expected to win this case. It’s quite obvious from Sweeney’s own testimony that none of their arguments hold up. It’s a publicity stunt pure and simple.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.