• brsrklf@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    Wow, this is complete bullshit.

    And I am saying that even though I have zero love for the mobile gaming market, while I do own and like consoles. There is just no reason to consider they’re doing things any differently on this matter.

    30% seems quite a lot, no matter the platform, especially for small indie studios. I’d care more about these than whatever the Fortnite machine has to pay.

    • BorgDrone@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      11 months ago

      30% seems quite a lot, no matter the platform,

      I’ve been developing mobile apps since before the iPhone was a thing. I remember when the App Store was announced, including the 30% cut for Apple. There was a lot of excitement around the fact that developers could keep 70%.

      Before app stores, this is how you distributed and charged for a mobile app: customers would send a text message with a keyword to a so called shortcode, depending on country this was a 4 or 5 digit phone number. For example, you would send ‘NAMEOFGAME’ to 12345. The user would then get a text message back with a link to download the game. The message they got back was a so called reverse-billing SMS (also known as premium SMS). This message would be billed to the customer, at a certain rate that you as the sender of the SMS could configure. This basically meant customers paid for games through their phone bill.

      How this worked from the developer’s side:

      • You generally didn’t own the short code, it was shared with many users, you had to pay a monthly fee for the use of that keyword. Companies who owned a ‘nice’ shortcode (like e.g. 12345) would charge more for it than those who owned a more difficult to remember one. This would cost you at least €100 a month per keyword (the same as you pay for an app store account per year, for an unlimited number of apps)
      • For this amount all the operator did was forward the message to you, you had to have your own server to process the messages. Your server then had to call an API at the telco to send an premium SMS back with the link. (a so called WAP push message). The telco would usually keep 50% of the total cost to the customer. Send a €3.00 SMS , you get €1.50, the telco gets €1.50. For sending 140 bytes to a phone.
      • The link you sent pointed to your own server, where you had to host the files for the game for the user to download.

      Note that there was no store, no way for users to discover your game, so you had to advertise it as well. The telco’s took 50% for billing the customer, while you had to everything else. Of course the development tools for mobile apps were absolute shit as well.

      So when Apple announced that they would let you keep 70%, would take care of hosting, payments, would provide a nice user friendly app store where people could actually find your app and provide decent development tools for you to build apps in, that was a fucking huge win.

        • BorgDrone@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          There was no rule, but it was basically the only convenient way. Receiving e-mail on a phone was not at all common, typing a long URL on phone was a PITA and paying for stuff online was not something a lot of people were familiar with.

          WIndows CE phones and the like were so niche there was no point in even developing apps specifically for them.

          Also note that the above would usually only work in one country, if you wanted to sell internationally you’d have to make arrangements for a shortcode and RB-SMS for each country you wanted to sell in. Never mind the advertising campaigns. Apple taking care of that, with basically global reach and different kinds of payment methods without you having to worry about any of it was quite revolutionary.

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      Honest question: how is it possibly “complete” bullshit, when we know for a fact that console makers are taking like a hundred dollar wash on every console sold whereas Apple and Google make substantial profit on every device sold?

      I mean I would love to see consoles forced to allow sideloading and alternate app stores too, but I can’t fathom how you cant see the difference in business models…

      • brsrklf@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        Someone linked to it already, but yeah, about that…

        Note that it was 1 year ago. So the hardware is probably less expensive now and the exceptions are at the very least not as marked.

        And of course, it was never true for the Switch to begin with.