True, we don't know. But my point is that it's possible, even likely, that Epic already had the data about PS4 sales and time spent to know that the clause wouldn't need to be invoked unless they did something to shake up the system. Hence why it's more acceptable to them than Apple taking a flat free but generating little revenue in comparison.
Jesus you are right, the emphasis is on revenue and not profit!
It has nothing to do with being happy or unhappy, it's about Epic feeling like they have a sound legal argument.
And there we go. Again this is shit for devs. Why is Sony the only one doing this? And all the warriors in this thread need not reply. Can you imagine Steam doing this or Nintendo or Microsoft? The outrage would be doomsday lvls. If on some fundamental lvl we as a forum can't agree that this is shit for devs and us as consumers then just lock the thread because the defense force for this is just plain dumb.
It has nothing to do with cross-play though. It's about cross-progression and mtx
Well if you read the transcript they were not happy with Sony's stance on crossplay, which is why they proved how easy it was to simply turn it on. Of course they didn't want to lose them entirely because of how much PS4 earned them money so they came to an agreement, it will be interesting to see how this transpires on the PS5 unless PSN is the only outlier that matters.
There are games with cross-play without cross-progression though
And that hurts a lot of developers, especially indies, in the process. So it continues to hold back progress on crossplay becoming more widespread because now there's a revenue risk if you involve Sony platforms.
The analogy would be you go to a store, try the shoes out, have a coffee, then go to a different store and buy them cheaper. That's not weird that's super normal. The reason Sony put this clause in is because they can and it squeezes out more money.
Imagine how bad this hurts smaller devs who will likely opt to not do cross play at all or just section PlayStation users off. It sucks ass for everyone involved and just because as a multimillion dollar corporation Sony is expected to make decisions like this doesn't mean we have to empathize with them
Not if it means that the extra 5% mean a loss for the lifetime of the product and gaas or f2p could last forever.
That's not similar at all. Someone that plays on PlayStation is very unlikely to bother to go find a pc or Xbox to log in with.
Well yeah, the clause is there to protect against that. If it's not the case, the clause isn't triggered. They define reasonable limits.
And yet that's what's causing this clause. That Sony fears people buying the v-bucks elsewhere.
The analogy from the shoe store was about multiple shoe stores being next to each other was good for business, because it creates a rising tide. You seem to think there is no rising tide with a game that creates critical mass through crossplay. Sony alone seems to think this too, or they just don't care and would rather see a game crash than provide revenue for the other platforms.
There aren't similar clauses, Tim Sweeney said that under oath.
Well there should be. For Sony they're contributing a big chunk of the Fortnite playerbase (almost half) so it's actually a lot of money.
Nothing about this is fair lol, it's not their revenue. Kudos on Sony for extorting money.
If the cut is way below their contribution in terms of playerbase, it's Epic extorting Sony. Sony just put a clause to protect against that eventuality. I have no need to discuss this any further.
Probably because none of what you're saying holds up to any kind of scrutiny. How is a game being cross-platform extorting the platform holder, like what.
It's more like 1% pays, given how free to play games usually work. If Sony doesn't consider F2P fair, they should not allow it. If they're worried that the competition makes a bit more than them, they should try to compete better, not run a racket where publishers have to pay them for competitors being more competitive.
Not what I said. My point is right there in what you quoted. "if the cut is way below their contribution in terms of playerbase".
Not what I said. It's not that "other platforms are competing better". Sony is protecting itself from cases where people play on their console and buy MTX on their phones or PCs or whatever.
Sure.
Apologies if I've misunderstood you (it's early and I haven't had my coffee yet) but the penalty fees are calculated monthly so this absolutely would trigger because that 5% is for that month, not lifetime.
