Except we all know the real option will be to buy game X from X's own app store for $39.00, so the only thing the consumer has gained is extra friction in exchange for the developer pocketing a larger share.
> Except we all know the real option will be to buy game X from X's own app store for $39.00
Why? Epic Store is literally giving games and discount vouchers away so you'd get _on_ they're platform. You somehow imply that there wouldn't be competition between competing services?
Seems a little short-sighted. Epic are not a charity. Discounts are clearly a ploy to capture marketshare from Steam et al... Games/products will always be priced the most the market is willing to pay for it. If just before launch costs drop by half do you really think the price drops by half?
PC gaming has been the most competitive and consumer beneficial software platform by an absurd margin for a long time now. I'm sure we can attribute at least some of this to the freedom of the market?
For people like (excuse my bluntness) us hacker news types sure. I can make a case that for a large chunk of the population this is not true - consoles are popular because people don't want to have to deal with the added complexity that came from "freedom".
If Epic wins, any user who wanted a walled garden (e.g. iOS) rather than open (e.g. Android) will be deprived of that choice. Ultimately, having looked into this quite a bit, I think this boils down to a debate whether the walled garden business model should be legal.
But most people won't be bothered to use other stores (just like most Android users don't use other stores).
The real solution there is forcing digital sales to include a perpetual license to the software independent of the platform. The current digital monopoly culture is against the overwhelming majority of citizens.
1. Buy game X from Apple's app store for $39.00.
2. Buy game X from X's own app store for $30.00.
Would you install X's app store then? Would you at least want the option of choosing that path?