-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
During Epic Apple case, Microsoft lawyer says they've never made a profit selling Xbox consoles
- Thread starter kyliethicc
- Start date
Right.It includes PS5 R&D that year and that is massive.
PS4 started to profit on hardwarae around April/May 2014.
Sony CEO Kaz Hirai says PS4 is already profitable
The PlayStation 4 is already profitable for Sony on a hardware unit basis, president and CEO Kazuo Hirai announced during its corporate strategy meeting this week. "It's been a hugely successful...www.polygon.com
"The PlayStation 4 is already profitable for Sony on a hardware unit basis, president and CEO Kazuo Hirai announced during its corporate strategy meeting this week."
Also I think the Pro was also for a profit.
On one hand this is nothing new. But...ever? Even with console revisions last gen Or even late the previous gen with the 360 revisions?
Magnific0giganticus
Banned
Ok. Fair point. So they were on the verge of closing out Xbox a few years ago (2014). They continued bleeding money, they don't make a penny on hardware ans incur in even more big expenses...you think they made their way to profitability? They don't post profits = losses. See it however you want. If they were making money for once they would simply say it without having to make an official report. They don't, so they're conceding they're in the red.
DaGwaphics
Member
If that was the model they started with and people chose to adopt the OS with those restrictions, I say let the free market be. They should have their 30%.
If Windows switched to that model today after so many years of being an open platform, with so many companies and individuals reliant on it, I think that would be an anti-trust nightmare.
theHFIC
Member
I haven't seen yet in the trail where Apple forced 60% of the country to buy their devices. Public utilities are a necessity for survival for most people. A phone is great to have, owning an iPhone is great, but there are others out there at all types of price points. Yet people decided to choose Apple.
And all those developers that "fucking hate" Apple all still seem to be chomping at the bit to work with them despite these apparently horrible tactics that use.
In the words of one of the most popular Khaled memes here. Apple is simply Suffering from Success which leaves a lot of people hurt and in 2nd place or on the losing side so of course they are going to go after them and try to have to rules re-rewritten to cater to them.
ethomaz
Banned
PS3 in hardware terms was a huge loss to Sony... it just started to profit a year or two after PS3 Slim (2010-2011?) but it was never enough to cover the loses in the first 4-5 years.
So yes overall PS3 hardware itself never give profit to Sony just like Xbox One.
The opposite case of PS4 that in 6 months started to be sold at profit and in very fast covered the loses in the first 6 months being a console that give profit to the company at hardware level.
Last edited:
Tripolygon
Banned
I'm sure there are tons of developers just waiting for the chance to jump from Apple Store to Epic Games store. Think these things through. Epic store offers "better" deal than steam in terms of cut and yet EGS is fighting an uphill battle to gain market share. Android has had the ability to sideload other app stores yet Google play store is the dominant store. PS Now and Xcloud are not competing in the same market as Apple store and neither is Epic Games store. Developers are not lining up to switch from Apple Store to EGS on iOS.
Last edited:
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Yeah my point is... the market for cell phones is really driven by the fact they are used as toys... for games, music, movies.. taking photos, sharing those photos.. buying special filters to make me look cute on Insta...
That's why we spend $1000 on them.. that's where most of the rest of our money goes... that's the only reason we need better processors, GPUs, etc.
It's a device whose profits are driven by it being a toy, wrapped up in a veneer of it being something else. All cell phones are.
My point isn't necessarily that they should or shouldn't be allowed to charge a cut.. my point is.. it's a pointless distinction that iPhones are also used for non-Toy purposes... why does that matter to whether they should or shouldn't be allowed to charge a cut of money being spent on the device?
The only reason MS and Sony lock down their systems even more... is because they don't want you doing things that skirt them making money.. it's all the same shit. Sony hid the browser on the PS5, why? Probably because it's becoming more and more possible to play games via a web browser, games Sony wouldn't see a dime of. Sound familiar?
It's illogical to think that those being MORE restrictive with their devices should be the ones allowed to charge more money.. it makes no fucking sense to me lol You can pretty much always get around giving Apple extra money by making any service work in a web browser... and in fact that's what the vaaaast majority of services have. And Apple does nothing to restrict that other than not let you have an app that tells users to go to the web site so Apple doesn't get their money.
Last edited:
Smoke6
Member
Well this isn’t the case anymore due to gamepass, and non of there games even chart anymore soo...
harmny
Banned
fuck those companies. microsoft should be able to do whatever they want with their products. they are free to use linux if they don't like it.
theHFIC
Member
I apologize for misinterpreting your original meaning with it. I agree with all these statements. What I add on personally as that that yes it is a toy device or entertainment/productivity device but not a computer where it should be treated like a computer in regards to multiple app stores, etc.
I do feel the 30% rate at this point should be changed and I know Apple made a couple efforts for I think under $1M profit but it should be across the board because there are so many other services to subsidize with now. It could be a power move for Apple as well if the other makers stay at 30%.
this argument isn't about Fortnite exclusively, its about whether apple should have the right to control such a massive portion of the global economy and scrape 30% off the top for doing fuck all and whether they have used that power responsibly. This isn't the first case against apple and it wont be the last. We agree that games being played on a device is a meaningless point of data, you can do that on watches and teslas's, it leads to no meaningful definition or distinction.
You are only able to do business on your phone in the way apple allows, they can revoke access to core software at any moment and you would have no recourse. Lucky for you you work in industries that aren't currently effected by apples petulance, for the people who work in the game industry their threat to bar unreal engine support would have liquidated many jobs independent of epic. The fact that apple has such a large amount of importance and control over a giant part of the game industry purely on accident tells you a lot about how much of that profit and influence was earnt.
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
I believe he means “ever” in overall hardware thought the generation.
For PS3 started to give profit per console sold in 2020-2011 I believe and it was never enough to cover all the lose from 2006 to 2010... so overall the PS3 hardware never give profit.
360 was an atypical case... it was sold ar loss for the first years and had everything to recover but RROD happened... they have so much loss with the RROD that the whole generation was not enough to cover it just like PS3.
Both PS3 and 360 looking at hardware alone were a big loss to the companies.
Last edited:
DaGwaphics
Member
In all honesty, I actually agree with that. I'm very pro free-market. But, regulators probably wouldn't go with it so much.
I'm a firm believer that so long as you don't have a monopoly, which Apple clearly does not have, other alternatives will rise when someone gets a little too greedy.
ethomaz
Banned
“Never” is related to the hardware not a period of time.
With all Xbox sold they didn’t have profit.
With all Xbox 360 sold they didn’t have profit.
With all Xbox One sold they didn’t have profit.
Last edited:
I said this some time after the One X launched: MS might have been better off making a $399 console that would have still been more powerful than the Pro. Might have been a smaller advantage but they would have still had their most powerful headline.
It might have helped close the gap more with a better price.
IMO...MS leans too hard into the specs pr war. This gen will be no different.
Gotta get those headlines and appease the fandom tho, right?
Right now its looking more n more like the One X was a mistake. (those specs that caused it to have that price)
Last edited:
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
What petulance though?
They had rules in place, those rules were clearly understood... the signed licensing agreement was broken, on purpose, by Epic. It's the company who gets dinged for such a blatant violation, and they ended up getting Unreal pulled.
I do agree that is important enough that the injunction was correct forcing Apple to re-enable their other account, but I think the only petulance here is from Epic.
And what I said has nothing to do with the industry I work in... the only industry effected is the industry of people selling apps and services. The employees at a company selling games on iOS are also probably using Outlook for free... and bankers, and school teachers, etc.,etc.
They do have a massive portion of the overall app economy on their device (which is by and large, a "luxury" economy), and they reap many profits from that. And that should put them on the radar of the DOJ and others.
But it's about how they've used that power, not just that they have it.
If it's unfair for Apple to not let Epic use their own payment processor, then why is it not unfair for Microsoft or Sony? They are all doing the exact same thing.. Sony has 10's of billions of the same market in their control, and they don't even let you participate unless you can get a dev kit. So why would they be immune to any ruling?
I'm not arguing that Apple should be allowed.. my argument is that Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo are all in the same bucket, and have even more restrictive practices... Sony has a MASSIVE amount of power for instance.. a large portion of an economy at their whims, and it's not like they are the kind and gentle arbiter of that economy. What exactly do you think Sony would have done if Epic had purposefully patched in a circumvention of the PSN store profits?
Last edited:
When the private sector becomes big enough and unassailable enough they become a massive drag on the health of the market and competition within, this is when the government steps in to investigate and in extreme cases, break them up. Nobody is ever forced to support the rise of a monopoly or duopoly but it happens anyway. They must be checked to avoid stagnation in important sectors of the economy and society. how they use their influence once they reach prominence is key and apple is not squeaky clean. There are jobs that require you to be on tap or easily accessible, some people don't even have desktops anymore, phones have become essential and it has only been accelerated by the pandemic.
Only two real options for mobile OS's exist, not many.
Developers hate apple but they are forced to deal with their bullshit because of the current realities of the market.
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
And what 'bullshit" is that which differs from what Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo are doing?
Apple is less restrictive to developers by a WIDE margin in this area.
I could create a game on iOS, pay Apple the yearly dev fee, which includes getting some support from them... submit it, and have it for sale likely within 48 hours.
This is a market segment that was created by Apple, that barely existed before Apple.. and massively increased the freedom of developers to make money compared to game consoles. The only thing less restrictive is the PC space.
The people who "hate" Apple are the ones trying to inject storefronts on iOS. Either by way of what Epic is doing (just blatantly violating rules) or by releasing cloud streaming apps. Apple is stepping in to stop them.. which should be evaluated.
But if Apple isn't allowed to block 3rd party storefronts.. or game streaming apps that circumvent their storefront.. or games to have MTX you can buy from the device w/o an Apple cut.. ,why in the world should Sony and Microsoft and Nintendo who are far more restrictive be allowed to?
The argument seems to be "well those devices are MORE restrictive.. therefore they should be allowed... more control".. it doesn't make a lick of sense to me.
Last edited:
jakinov
Member
The platform owner doing it what enables the better user experience. The platform doing it centralize and makes the experience more consistent by forcing developers to follow certain guidelines and giving users a integrated consistent way of doing things.. If they don't do it. People complain. Things like universal login, friends, profiles, inviting/joining, communication, moderation. And then providing other random services like LFG, feeds, communities/groups, leaderboards, trophies and shareplay. If the platform wasn't doing it, you'd probably have to register and login to every publisher and create a new friends list for every game or service. There's nothing stopping this from happening at the per-developer level either. Then you'd have to rely on developers/publishers to give you the right communication features and having their own moderation systems.
What Microsoft and Sony do go beyond just the actual servers to host the games, on top of the actual services that power everything they also have to develop native operating system features and applications that leverage these services. Renting servers to run code is cheap. Developing software (services or applications or operating system features) and paying people to ensure high availability of general services or to provide customer support are not. Both Sony (PlayStation) and Microsoft operate do the bulk of their work in the US and try to hire some of the best people in the world. That's very expensive. We're talking compensation packages in the hundreds of thousands for all the engineers and management. Fairly high salaries for all the IT and not super high but a lot of salaries for all the support they offer (chat, phone, email, message boards).Even from an operations stand point, Microsoft/Sony running servers to offer something like identity services to acomplish universal single-sign-on has a whole different cost structure than a game publisher running a game server to synchronize clients. Availability matters more, load is heavier, security is a bigger issue; and so you are paying for more expensive people and more expensive hardware and/or services to help provide those.
Punkster88
Banned
petulant because apple threatened to effectively remove unreal engine from the system, a business and a piece of software completely separate to the breach of contract with Fornite. It was a move aimed purely at epic's bottom line as a point of retaliation and would have fucked over many people completely unrelated to epic. If Microsoft sued them over their blocking of gamepass and they revoked access to Microsoft office you or others would be pissed for the same reasons and even that wouldn't be as bad as fucking over a person whose entire job is iOS development.
we agree that it will largely come down to how apple has used its influence, they don't have a completely clean record. In some cases like with the Series X it is justified since the system itself would not exist without a significant cut of software sales, more broadly the cover that iOS devices are also used for luxury means does not cover the fact that they are very often used for professional and basic social needs, this will always be the fundamental difference.
01011001
Banned
I think more than 20 million GamePass subscribers and dozens of millions more Xbox Live Gold subscribers are more than enough to make a profit
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
It's an exceptional situation though... Epic is the company that creates both products.. the company itself didn't just violate a rule, they did it purposefully and blatantly... the company is who holds the dev account, and Epic skirting that with a separate entity was akin to someone creating an alt account on NeoGAF, or an Ebay seller who was banned creating an alt.
I do agree with the injunction on Apple's threat to remove Unreal, but it's an "Epic is too big to fail" scenario, and speaks to how irresponsibly THEY acted as the producers of an important game engine.
It also certainly raised some eyebrows and all of that.
My point isn't that Apple should have been allowed to do that.. my point is that other companies enacting even MORE control shouldn't be ignored for some weird logic that they are "just game consoles".. or that their profit model differs (especially since that's not even true in the case of NIntendo.)
Fairness in app store policies should be a precedent for all if we are going to go that direction.
you're explaining why its nice for it to be centralised not why its expensive for them to run it, which it is not. The statement that it is essentially free money is correct.
The loss leader excuse is only relevant to Microsoft and sometimes Sony but it is relevant, this is just an objective statement about the current situation and I agree cannot and should not be used as a universal distinction (though it will always be relevant when Xbox and Sony are brought up as a shield). The simple fact is that apple has vast amounts of control over parts of the economy and society it didn't earn and doesn't fully understand, the scale alone is why more scrutiny is being placed on them. There are absolutely moves that only become illegal or questionable once you reach a certain size, none of the game companies are at that level and its even up for debate if apple is though I believe they are.
Last edited:
theHFIC
Member
Realistically there are only two options for a desktop OS as well (sorry Linux users) and Apple is FAR in the minority in that.
Is it their fault that they created a device and operating system, priced more expensive than the competition, and still came out on top?
Unknown Soldier
Member
You mean American technology companies that China is trying to break. Because that's what this is really about.
There is no qualm with desktop OS's currently because both major players provide open platforms, it is not really comparable situation (though Microsoft was actually under the same if not greater scrutiny for far less a few decades prior). Nobody is saying its illegal to outcompete other companies, its what they do to get there, what they do when they are at the top and how much power they wield.
Last edited:
So
Ozzy Onya A2Z
would you like to step up and eat your delicious crow now?
Ozzy Onya A2Z
would you like to step up and eat your delicious crow now?How can you make statements like this when they are clearly rumoured to be taking a loss (at least initially like Sony) for all generations.
Xbox Series X and Xbox Series S being sold at loss claims source
If the prices of the next gen Xbox consoles sound almost too good to be true that may be because Microsoft is making a loss with each one.metro.co.uk
https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/blog/techflash/2013/11/microsoft-selling-xbox-one-at-a-loss.html
Microsoft taking $126 hit per Xbox 360
<i> BusinessWeek</i> commissions study, which says the software giant is paying a premium on next-gen hardware.www.google.com
How do you think they would be making a profit on XSX but sony is taking a loss on PS5 when they are the same price? You are basing your statements on nothing but thin air.
Last edited:
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Of course; anti-trust isn't just about size.. or about actions, it's often the combination of the 2.
I just don't personally think collecting fees that are standard across the industry, that you haven't raised, but have in fact lessened over time (15% cut for those making less than a million, recently allowing some video service some lax, charitable apps don't have to pay, etc) is evidence of anti-competitive practices.
And the "smaller guys" who include Sony, raking in 10 billion+ from their app store a year are doing far more restrictive things, enacting far more control... and pretty much anything Apple is being accused of, they've done worse... and in this case, I don't think any of these concepts should matter how big they are.
In the end though to say Apple didn't "earn" is a bit nonsense. They invented a market segment (touch screen devices) while being laughed at by competitors.. they provide the developer frameworks, they market and sell the devices successfully to the benefit of the app makers, etc. And they got there by designing, creating, and marketing the devices.. they dont' buy up and crush competition, they aren't working to stop others from innovating.. and I do not see some great evidence that compared to their peers they are acting unfairly, and in fact are MORE fair than many of their peers.
I think some examination of what ALL of these people do is necessary... and Apple is far from the worst offender, if we are going to consider these offenses.
Last edited:
I wasn't aware all those western tech companies and developers moving against apple, including Microsoft, Spotify and Nvidia were all Chinese agents.
Craig of War
Banned
Never made a profit yet buying studios left and right and spending so much on gamepass and other stuff it crazy like no other gaming company can do such thing wile making zero profit.
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
You really think this isn't also Tim Sweeney's bone to pick? Are you aware of his history? Railing against Microsoft for the Windows Store long before Epic ever had any foreign investors.
And Epic is majority owned by him... Tencent does not have a controlling stake... and Epic operates completely independently.
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I think it's deeper than just Sweeney as well.
Iced Arcade
Member
Oh Kenny. Never change
Exactly, if the terms aren't good then that would only deprive them of content.
Steve Jobs didn't like games and didn't want them to be as big a part of his platform as they were, it happened regardless. Apple doesn't aid developers of any industry in the development of their apps in the way a specialty device owner often does, they do the opposite, they have strange proprietary requirements that are a pain to deal with but people do it independently to gain access to the market, apple sits and takes the profit. I don't think the 30% number itself is the problem, it is that no competition or circumvention is possible.
Apple pulling shit like blocking game service apps (gamepass) while pushing their own is not uncommon and is absolutely anti competitive behaviour once you reach a certain size.
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
And those device manufacturers charge thousands of dollars for you to join up with them.. and won't even necessarily let you. 10's of thousands. And you think consoles are lacking in proprietary requirements?
Xbox is the only one that really has open development; and that doesn't give you access to them, nor even their entire capabilities of the system.
And where is PSNow on Xbox? Where is GamePass on PS5? It will never happen.. won't even be part of the conversation.. Where is the Microsoft Video store on Playstation?
Sony even hides their web browser on PS5. I wonder why.
They are MORE restrictive, not less.
ALL of these companies do a large amount of things to encourage or force you to spend money with them, rather than someone else, using their devices. Apple at the very least has a fully supported web browser. And for the most part they don't outright block things, they just enact restrictions that companies don't want to do. Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo just won't even begin a convo with you if you make certain types of apps, or you make products for certain companies.
Last edited:
The only platform holder who I have heard complaints on the level of apple with is Nintendo and even then its more about neglect. The constant, frequent struggle to update your shit after apple intentionally and needlessly breaks compatibility (to sell new phones) is reason enough to hate them.
Monopoly behaviour is when you use your leverage to gain an unfair advantage, it's especially egregious in sectors that are outside your main area of business, it is blatantly obvious that no one game console is big or important enough to even approach such claims.
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
I think you are just way over-exaggerating things here in general in regards to the experience of developing mobile apps on iOS. Nothing in this case has anything to do with that either, this case is about payment processing and fee collecting.
and you're underplaying how much developers dislike apple, it's directly related to the point of them "earning their app markets" which is a hard point to maintain.
Last edited:
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
I've developed apps for iOS and Android, managed the development of many more apps on larger projects.. work with people whose entire career revolves around developing mobile apps, etc.
I've never met anyone who even had a modicum of disdain for iOS development. For the most part most modern development environments/frameworks are pretty developer friendly.
Revolutionary
Member
I genuinely thought this was common knowledge...
Similar threads
- Poll