padib said:
Good questions. Yes, Apple Arcade is a direct competitor for games as a service. While the technology under the delivery is different (games are downloaded and then played), it offers a direct competing service to xCloud and Stadia since they are all based on a subscription model, and if the library and priced matched, they would be nearly identical services, bar the delivery (one streamed, the other fully downloaded digitally). It's not clear whether these services need to be playable on iOS to succeed, but Apple has 30% of the global marketshare, and in the united states it has 56%. The others could possibly succeed without being playable on iOS, but it cuts potentially 50% of their audience, which at the amount it costs to offer cloud gaming, could make it an unprofitable proposition, esp. in the US where all 3 companies are headquartered. The task of submitting games for Apple's review doesn't pose a barrier, but could result in abuse of power by Apple (which is the case with OP), and allows Apple again too much power in dictating what is playable on these streaming platforms, something it never required from other non-gaming streaming services. It begs the question, is this preferential treatment due to Apple trying to block competitors on its OS? It all points to yes. |
Based on my knowledge of anti-trust laws (I still haven't taken a class, but have read a bunch of cases involving anti-trust claims in Civil Procedure) that probably wouldn't cut it. I think the rationale that they screen all games through the review process would probably hold up in court. If they could show that Apple is reviewing games on XCloud unfairly, then maybe there's a case.
