Is What Epic Wants for App Stores What else do other game Developers Actually Would Like? -
While mobile app and game creators yell to the sky in the face of a 30% taxation on all duopoly revenues worldwide, Epic Games has emerged as the leader of the gaming industry in its fight for open computing for mobile devices.
Privately, they asked large and smaller studios of games alike what they wanted Here is what they said they would like to see.
Background: The Slow Decline of Open Computing, and the 30% tax on apps
The world of computing has never been more open than it is today. In the past games and software creators have relied on the free computing of PC and Mac platforms as it has enabled developers to create titles whenever they want, keep unspoken relationships with their users and also choose payment methods which work best for them. There was no barrier-keeperssimply a computer players, and a game. However, the game is evolving.
Today, over half of the time that screens are used to work is done on mobile devices, a share that's growing -as well as more than 90% of the world's smartphone OS market share is shared between Apple and Google. Due to this dominant position on mobile-related market share, as well as tight controls on game distribution and ecommerce, the world that is connected to the internet is now is in danger more than ever before. This is causing a huge price for both consumers as in the case of app and game developers.
In the case of both Google as well as Apple's app stores impose an additional 30% charge for sales of games and products that are distributed through their platforms. Apple is in control of 100 percent of the distribution of games as well as ecommerce for iOS devices. However, Google lets OEM marketplace apps and the sideloading of mobile game but it also restricts third-party gaming in-game payments for games offered through Google Play.
Google Play does offer a third-party payment integration service with a limited number of game developers through its " user choice billing" testing; however "user choice billing" comes with a hefty annual market charges of 26%, even if you opt to integrate with the preferred payment processor and take on all risks and obligations to comply with the payment.
The result of Apple as well as Google's control over such large swaths of computing in the world is that they have a default 30% tax for mobile apps and games and games, which is charged by users. The tax is not distributed to developers of games which hinders open-source commerce and computing. Due to this monopoly on open computing, developers of games that are small as well as big believe they have to change their ways.
What do game developers who don't have Epic Games Want?
Our team began a months-long quest to interview game developers both big and small regarding what they'd like to see change in policy for mobile apps. Although not all were in agreement on the various aspects, they agreed on the three most important items they said they would like to see:
1. iOS to support sideloading games which do not show scare screens.
iOS has been restricted for quite a while "sideloading" applications and games -- in which the application is downloaded out of the App Store, the website of the developer or from an different market. The ability to sideload allows users to purchase games and for developers to promote and sell games however they choose and that the user agrees to accept. Android allows sideloading of games and apps, but only in conjunction with the horrendous warnings as "scare screens" that warn smartphone owners about the risk associated with "downloading applications from the internet." A majority of game designers who we talked to believed that Apple ought to be able support sideloading. Additionally, they felt that it's crucial that Apple as well as Google do not make use of self-serving screens that disparage software distribution outside of their own storefronts to sell apps.
2. You can enjoy an unlimited "steering" and integrated payment via third-party payment platforms.
Both Google as well as Apple have strict restrictions on pricing options as well as purchasing options offered through third-party payment service providers outside the app stores. It means that the same purchase could be available for lower prices to the consumer however game developers aren't allowed to steer their players to those alternatives, or provide links to different purchase experiences or integrate the purchase from third-party vendors in their games. Although many game designers spoke to us found immense benefit in stores, the most common option was to give players and developers the possibility to get rid of steering or embedding limitations on payments.
3. Zero fee for embedded and steering payments as well as embedding.
The ability to allow steering and embedded payment can be a challenge, however similar to what we've seen in the Google "user preferred billing" pilot, having the capacity to do something and the incentive financially to do the thing is a different matter. In the case of "user preference billing" offering a massive 26% cost for transactions from third party payment providers, teamed with the charges these service providers charge, this equates to a $0 advantage to the vast majority of game developers. We spoke with game developers who believed that the zero percent rate was a fair amounts for transactions that were not part of the store for apps. The majority of them were inclined to accept some sort payment for apps that would help to increase the downloading and use of games. Naturally the 26% percentage of any transaction conducted through a third-party is a far cry from the amount game designers thought was reasonable.
What's Next
There are many more specific demands about the way apps function, that game developers would like to know about. These three requirements are at the heart of what developers feel would drive true change in open computing for mobile.
About
David Nachman David is CEO of the company, which is a trusted and complete e-commerce provider to software companies. David is in charge of overseeing the development of the company to build on its successful of providing top eCommerce services to the increasing market for software. In the last 20 years, David has been in roles ranging from functional vice presidents to CEO at high-growth companies such as Vision, Velocify, and HireRight.
This post was first seen on here