[psahgal]

This IGN article from 2019 has a good summary of how much each digital storefront takes in revenue cut! https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10/07/report-steams-30-cut...

Nintendo also takes a 30% cut, although it used to be 35% for WiiWare games. This does NOT include the cost of acquiring development hardware, which usually sets you back $1000 at most. 30% is actually the industry standard; Steam takes 30% and Epic Games takes 30% for smaller titles.

Regarding your comment on captive platforms, I think there's a bit of a difference between a home console and a smartphone. A home console is considered a luxury item, while a smartphone has quickly become a necessity in today's connected world.

For home consoles, market competition is fierce. Not only is there Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft, but there's also the PC gaming market, which includes devices in a variety of form factors. There's also multiple storefronts. You can buy console games from physical stores, in which case physical retailers take a cut, purchase Steam keys from other vendors, trade physical games, etc. In summary, there's a lot of ways to acquire your games.

In contrast, smartphones are seen as a necessity by many, and there are really only two options: Android or iOS. Each has a dedicated storefront that captures almost their entire user base. This gives Apple and Google a LOT of power over what people can run on their devices, and it practically gives them a guaranteed source of income. I can see why people's attitudes are different towards the Apple/Google duopoly, and that few people are complaining about Nintendo's monopoly on the eShop.

[samatman]

> there are really only two options: Android or iOS

Now, you subtly moved the goalposts here. I'm not even saying you did it on purpose, just drawing attention to it.

Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft, are hardware manufacturers with integrated, proprietary software stacks, just like Apple. Androids are made by dozens of manufacturers, and you can side load, use the App Store of your choice, and so on.

The fact that Play Store does the lions share of business is the sum of: doing a great job, and nudging users in that direction through various defaults. Fact is, you can load what you want on an Android, and to me that undermines the case for forcing Apple to do likewise.

I'd still like the ability to sideload apps on my iPhone, and think it's worth pushing on Apple to get there. But as long as there are general-purpose phones available for purchase, and there are, I don't see the anticompetitive argument in the iPhone being a console: either put up with it or don't buy one.

I'm drawing a distinction between a bad business decision which customers should push Apple to change, and anticompetitive behavior which governments should force Apple to stop engaging in. I don't see the case for the latter.

[psahgal]

I agree with your argument that the policies on iOS app development are similar to the policies enforced by console manufacturers. I think any regulation pushed onto Apple to open up the App Store will actually affect the home console market, too.

I'm just struggling to figure out why the PERCEPTION is very different between iOS and the home console market. It feels like many iPhone users do not believe their smartphone can be substituted with one from another manufacturer. Those same users also complain that they're locked into the App Store. (I think there's a few people in the comments here that have done exactly that.)

At the same time, the majority of mobile app revenue is coming from iOS, which is pushing app developers to the platform, even though they dislike the terms of the App Store.

I'm not sure what the solution is here, but an ecosystem with a large number of members who are unhappy with the status quo doesn't seem very sustainable.

[samatman]

> I'm just struggling to figure out why the PERCEPTION is very different between iOS and the home console market.

I think a lot of it is the Hacker News effect. Folks around here take free-as-in-free-software seriously, and good for them (us). I'm confident the median iPhone user just downloads apps and uses them; they haven't thought much about alternate app stores and probably wouldn't use them if they were available. I'm pretty sure that iPhone users who complain about software freedom are a tiny minority of all users, especially since the wild world of rooted Android phones is out there for people who feel strongly about such things.

I do get your point, though: consoles are luxury playthings if you're not in professional esports, and phones are a de facto necessity of modern life. It doesn't follow that most, or even many, iPhone users, are discontented with Apple's policies: I figure the bulk of them haven't thought about it once, quite sure my mother and brother haven't.