Let's check in with Fortnite...

 Good lord, what is happening in there?

It does one credit to try and stay on top of the gigantic monolith of cross-brand marketing which is known as Fortnite, because to just ignore it is to live a life of lies. I mean, we joke all we want about the insanity of the metaverse and the stupid proposition that any one brand can hold the combined IPs and properties of everyone in a gloved gauntlet of oppression, but that doesn't quite feel so funny when we're talking about a project that pretty much has done that and is merely in the process of doing victory laps around the parking lot. Fortnite is the home of brands, plain and simple. if you are a brand, Fortnite will come sliding into you DMs at somepoint, luring you in with honeyed words and slight flirtations, before sneaking an arm around you shoulder at the feature, playing a little game with your collar bone to keep you distracted, and then dislocating it's jaw like a snake and latching it's jagged-edged teeth across your entire head, painfully and methodically swallowing you into itself. Less 'Lovecraftian' and more 'Cronenberg'.

Which is probably how we ended up with the current release of Fortnite, the premier of which not only revealed the next act in the Fortnite play, but also contained with it a reveal for the release of the next game from the Rocket League developers, Rocket Racer, existing entirely within Fortnite itself. It is insane to think that Fortnite's dream of becoming a platform is no longer limited just to how players and brands collide across it's many systems, but also now how other developers look up the software. I know that Fortnite has had comprehensive building tools for a while now, enough to potentially rival what Roblox has, but you never hear about a serious developer releasing their next title on Roblox. (It happens, but not from millionaire success-story developers.) Some sort of 'Advent Horizon' has certainly been crossed by the Fortnite folks and it positively runs my blood cold to think of. Imagine if Hollow Knight Silksong is taking so long because they're porting the whole thing into Fortnite! Gods I- I don't know what I'd do. Is man so malleable that his fragile flesh walls can contain the chaos of creating a new Fortnite account past age twenty-five? No- I cannot possibly even consider such a disgrace... can I?

But that is not the only act in Fortnite's current play. You probably don't need to hear this because of how everyone has seen the transition with their own eyes, but the current season of Fortnite has lightly shirked off the Battle Royale's skin altogether in order to become a... survival crafting game in the vein of Minecraft? (Actually, maybe a little closer to Valheim for the more diminutive scale of the crafting.) And it's all rendered in Lego. Because we needed to throw in another brand selling their soul for quick profits. (Whatever happened to the quality Lego videogame brand, man?) Of course, because of the nature of the endless dozens of Fortnite servers, one can probably still log in for a cheeky bit of Battle Royale in some errant server... I think... but the main game is not a cooperative survival title for the next few months. And that is... so bizarre I don't even know what to think to be honest. Is that a great evolution or an insane trick to an audience of the bewildered? 

Already players of Fortnite have flocked, nay sped, to demonstrate exactly why they shouldn't be granted any remote powers of creativity. If desperately attempting to cause a ruckus as the Xenomorph during the Black History Month event a while back wasn't enough, trying to utilise Catwoman's 'whip crack' emote for shock effect, then how about this- It took creator's less then a day to recreate the 9/11 attacks. And yes, I said creator's, because the population of Fortnite apparently operate on the same malnourished and overworked braincell which bounced the exact same idea across every creator's head over the course of less than one day. (That is one overachieving Neuron! Nina would be proud. Or horrified, probably more horrified.) Which is great. Not really sure what Fortnite's team can do to combat this one, can't just disable an Emote here. Guess they can just bury their heads in their desks and wait for people to get bored on this one.

On the much more legal end, Epic Games managed to win themselves a lawsuit that might just tip fortunes further in their favour. Much a shock to myself, who long believed this to be an utterly frivolous case that would lead nowhere- the monopoly ruling. Basically the Play Store (And the Apple store, although I don't see them on this ruling) forced an app that ran on their infrastructure to use their platform stores in order to sale microtransaction which, given that both types of phones are ruled by either of those stores, would constitute a monopoly. Epic created their own entire storefront to get away from Steam's store royalties, squaring up against the mobile platforms was only a matter of time. And, by the gods, it seems that they actually won!

It's not quite certain what will come of this as of yet, but if Fortnite is given the go ahead to run their own first party store, and then return to the mobiles, it would be a much welcome income injection to Epic who are currently flushing untold millions down the drain in an attempt to make the Epic Store front a legitimate competitor to Steam, which reports say is pretty slow going. Of course, I want Epic to succeed because the more competition there are in these fields the greater everyone else has to step up their game, but I have seen what Epic does when given a storefront to run, and I still don't think the PC Epic store is even nearly as good as it could be. (At the very least we need better sorting options for our libraries. Steam needs them too, but Epic's need is dire.) And then there are the potential floodgates of now every two-bit scam mobile game might be allowed to open up their own sketchy links to questionable funding platforms. There's a lot to iron out.

This all sends quite the message, doesn't it? When it comes to the supremacy of Fortnite there's not one powerful enough to stand in their way, not even the giant that is Alphabet itself. I never thought anyone could win a monopoly lawsuit against the world's most powerful monopoly- considering how they rule online traffic, I assumed that those who earned the ire of Google merely got vanished from the Earth. But then, Fortnite do control the brands, don't they? Can any one person truly say that they've 'made it' in life unless they have themselves as a skin in Fortnite? Of course not. In today's digital world that is the singular mark of overall worth that we all seek with clammy and desperate hunger! I'm sure in a year's time we'll get the 'Google' Skin pack and the 'Apple' skin pack as the former legal enemies of Tim Sweeny become absorbed into the all-consuming body of his ever-feeding marketing baby, amorphous and abstract as it has become.

So Fortnite is still on it's A-game, it would seem. They recently broke their concurrent player count once again- which is insane to think about given how many years it's been since that game was the peak of the culture, and they remain influential in a world that refuses to move on without them. Given how I've not played the game in years it makes me feel just that little bit out-of-touch to not be playing the thing, but then I remind myself that I am an adult and being in the Fortnite player pool would be weird. I wonder how Minecraft still stacks up to Fortnite in terms of culture saturation? Would it be greater, given Minecraft's obvious influence on Fortnite's design, or has Fortnite eclipsed it? Or is the metric of brand collaboration a smoke screen of significance given false power by the veneer of the 'celebrity' age? Questions for philosophers, no doubt- that shall be argued in the historical annals several generations from now. 

What is up with Fortnite?

 Even the giants must quiver

In full honesty I have never been too much of a Fortnite head myself, just as I've never quite gravitated towards online ecosystems in general. I never Prestiged at a single COD game (Although I got very close in COD 4 for Wii) I never hit the active level cap in an MMO (Although again, very close in ESO) and I've never stuck with a Battle Royale for more than a month. I don't know what it is. Maybe I just can't stand the idea of playing the same map over and over trying to squeeze new experiences out of the same basic building blocks. Does that make me a reductionist? Perhaps. And of course it means that I haven't felt the regular cycle of Fortnite content bouncing around the already jumbled mess of my subconscious. Although that hasn't made me a total clueless dunce as to its going ons. Indeed, I could hardly have my finger on the trigger of the industry without feeling the rumblings of that lumbering titan as it moves. Which is why I can speak from an informed position when I say that Fortnite isn't making the waves it once did, I want to examine why that is and speculate if there is anything the game can do to shoot up its profile once more. 

First off it's a given; Fortnite ain't the headline grabbing apocalyptic event stealer it once was. Former Zodiac killer Senator Ted Cruise even aimed at video games in a recent unfocused rant about the causes of gun violence, and didn't even think to mention its name! Do you think that would have happened three or four years back? Hell no, the news networks of America and Britain would have been flooded with special segments about the dangers of the ultra violent cartoon shooter game. I know because three years ago those were the sorts of specials floating around. But today Fortnite has fallen so far from the public zeitgeist as the laymen's singular point-of-reference for all things gaming that it's no longer the go-to badguy in the cultural war against fictional violence! What have the alarmists and fear mongers to villainize now? Elden Ring? They don't even know what that is!

But we can be more numerical about this, by using that most typical of general interest gauging tools; Google Trends. Popular cultural items get googled often and so we can assess the active popularity of Fortnite by checking it's graph, seeing it had the most search traffic around October 2019, and see how the subsequent spikes in popularity, usually occurring around big events in Fortnite history, are shrinking in their size. The last spike at the end of 2021 was exactly half the size of the all time peak, which isn't exactly a death knell to hear but it does indicate a trend downwards in popularity that hasn't yet steadied itself out. The decline is very gradual given the sheer weight of the franchise we're talking about here, but it's consistent; Fortnite can't score the headlines like it used to. (I should note, however, that the baseline of searches outside of big events has remained remarkably stagnant. The game isn't heading to dropping off the face of the earth anytime soon.)

And it's not as though Fortnite hasn't had it's share of huge events in the time since it's heyday. There were the live concerts with huge stars, the movie premiers and even several big season and chapter end moments. In fact, have you figured out what big event caused the biggest surge in Fortnite search traffic in October 2019? I give you a clue, it's really obvious when you stop and think about it. It was the big Chapter 1 end when the game shut it's self off for a couple of days and scared kids were left scouring the Internet wondering if Fortnite had died before their very eyes. A funny time to be sure, but is that really the highlight of their publicity stunts they want to go down in history most for? Not hiring Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson to star as one of their characters, not having a Ariana Grande concert play in their game? Not having a cameo crossover with the biggest and highest grossing film ever made, at the time? Nope, trolling the kids takes the podium position apparently.

What has happened since within the game itself? Irrelevant of gaffes and stunts, how has the gameplay of Fortnite remained competitive? By keeping competitive within their own studio, as far as I can tell. Epic Games constantly rewrites the very foundational blocks of the Fortnite core game loop in order to keep the cycle fresh and somewhat exciting for those who stick with it, the perfect development cycle that a live service demands. (Which we see so many wannabe pretenders totally fail at; Halo Infinite!) Mech suits get swapped out for fishing gameplay, large sections of the established map get reworked or removed altogether, new gimmicks are shoved into the mix; playing Fortnite is like delving into the active mind of an utterly indecisive perfectionist, and that rollercoaster ride is difficult to get tired off entirely. And yet somehow people still do, but I think there's still some methods and avenues left for the development team to explore in order to properly confront and combat that Fortnite lethargy.

For one, and I know how this sounds but bear with me, I think Fortnite should pull back a little on all of the crossover promotions. I know, I know; those are the stamps of premium exclusivity that single out Fortnite from the crowd! But there's nothing to prove anymore from the Epic Games team. Fortnite has crossed over with every major fictional brand on the Earth and become truly mainstream, there's no need to establish nor maintain appearances; and nowadays it feels like the bulk of Fortnite's online coverage is dominated by an exhausting and unexhaustive parade of crossover deals. It's obnoxious. And whatsmore, it takes away effort from development into real content that might spruce up the experience in a substantial way that will make those who have long since put down the controller turn around and go "Oh, what's going on there then?" 

So what sort of crazy proclamation can I throw out and declare is Fortnite's singular path to success? Well nothing concrete, I can't claim to be the industry whisperer by any stretch of the imagination, but I wonder at what a total seismic shift to the playstyle of Fortnite might achieve. What if, through significant map reworks and content redesigns, Fortnite was to host, if not a whole chapter than at least a single season, itself in first person? Seems drastic, but it's something different and would change the flow of the game substantially. They might throw in a more casual death match style gamemode, if that concept doesn't sound too trite for their tastes; or maybe, and I like this idea the most, a large scale warfare battle royale gamemode. I'm talking single life, huge teams of up to twenty, battle for supremacy at the centre of the map. They just need something drastic to draw in headlines and transformative to lure in readers.

I don't think the sun has set on the Fortnite empire, not yet and not even nearly. Games like Fortnite have a tendency to linger well past their prime and fester into sores on the industry if left unloved, and I don't want to see the Industry's darling Battle Royale turn into a Blizzard-level stain on the medium. They've stumbled, but they haven't fallen off yet and I think Epic Games have exactly what they need to weather the knife's edge for a few years more before they do. At least ride the storm until you've got a sufficient Fortnite successor, Epic, you owe Generation Z that much! And to Apex Legends, and all the other Battle Royales that circle the Fortnite supremacy like starving vultures, I encourage the competition knowing that only through bitter contest can the finest warrior be minted. Let's forge the best Battle Royale the industry can muster

Fortnite banned in China

 Uh oh, China Blog? Abandon ship now, these tend to get messy... 

Woe and damnation be me, for I have to once again talk about China which means bringing up the CCP and I've run out of imaginative ways to call their 'President' a cuddly teddy boi. Okay, actually I'm lying on two counts there, first for having to do this, my depression might dictate I write something everyday, but it's not specific about what, and my namecalling has never been creative. But I just can't help pondering and posturing about the polices and directorates of a state who's dominance and influence seems like the inevitable progression of modern life. Look at it as the musing of a snail, watching the slow progress of rubber garden boots trodding across the path towards him, yet incapable of doing a single thing to stop them. That's about the level of morbid fascination that sparks between my eyes when I see "oh, another censorship overreach from the Middle Kingdom, how fun!"

Although, I suppose this story could be seen as another example of the classic school yard game "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes", because the Chinese Government haven't themselves done anything far abroad from their previously stated values, it's really Epic Games who tried to wiggle through their fire wall and is now looking at years of wasted development time splattered all over their hands. Epic wanted to tango with the biggest market in the world and I can't help it if I don't exactly feel sad that the whole thing didn't work out for them. It's not like this whole endeavour is going to wound the multibillionaire company too much. I mean, they've had enough capital to comfortably seek lawsuits, that they themselves aggrieved, against Apple and Google in the same year, something tells me that losing China isn't going to sink them just yet. (Although it might lead to some internal groups being shut down, and that does actually suck)

Pointedly, Tencent didn't manage to win a licence for Fortnite and the consequence is a shutting down of operations going forward within China, because of the tight hold that the CCP attempts to hold over their citizens and the entertainment products that are allowed within the great Chinese firewall. Previous games have had to kowtow to pressures to limit depictions of 'sacrilege to the dead', which essentially means no skeletons or skull iconography and probably no Liches from Baldur's Gate either, but maybe if you don't tell them what Liches technically are you might be able to get away with it. (Just say that they're really emaciated people who float) What's more distressing, however, is the fact that the CCP are against excessive depictions of violence, which doesn't mean torture, but just people dying in general. Huh, that's going to be a problem for a Battle Royale game, isn't it?

'Game for Peace', the Chinese version of  PUBG, got around this by having dead players get up and wave before fading away in a somewhat comical display showing how no one is really dying. (And seriously skirting technicality laws, if we're all being honest with ourselves.) Rainbow Six Siege had to make separate versions of maps for their launch in China that cut out some skulls from decorations in one of the levels. (I think they also cleaned up some bloodstains too. They got thorough.) The message is clear, it doesn't matter how big your game is or how much potential revenue it could score for the economy, you either play ball with the CCP or they will kick your ass out of here. Money making it no where near as important as cultural control over there.

But one would think that Fortnite shouldn't be in too much trouble here given everything the game is and how it portrays itself. At it's heart, Fornite is a cartoony shooter with soft edges that doesn't even so much as show blood when people are shot. Bodies are never on the floor for more than a few seconds, no scary skulls are present, (aside from some skins I guess) so the only real point of contention I might imagine would be the total deluge of weaponry available to characters based on very real world guns and artillery. I can certainly see why some parents over here get worked up about seeing their kids seeking out killing implements and seeing them as power-ups, I think it's misplaced fear, but I can at least comprehend how that line of worry is spawned.

Things aren't getting any more lenient over in Beijing, however, as we've seen from the increasingly stringent crackdowns on online free time that's hitting the youth and trickling up into adults. But even then, it is kind of cruel for the CCP to keep Tencent's version of Fortnite in the testing stage for three years before ultimately shutting the whole thing down. Especially since, whilst in the testing phase, the game was totally forbidden from charging players, meaning that the company has literally wasted three years of profits that could have gone anywhere else trying to currying favour with the unknowable whims of a power obsessed dictato- are we allowed to call the CCP 'dictators'? I mean it seems logical but that also sounds very confrontative for what is ostensibly a gaming blog. I'm just going to go ahead and call their methods 'aggressive' and leave it at that. (I can't afford holidays anyway, might as well burn all bridges for a future China visit.)

Some are looking at this as a poor omen for the future of the gaming industry over in China, for if even this hugely popular game can't get a foot in the door over at China, then who feasibly can? I can't pretend to know more about the situation over there then I rightly do, in fact I don't think any outside of the shadowy investor board of Tencent has the privilege of that infomation, but I do know the sort of message that this sends. The headache of breaking into China is only worth it for games companies because of the number of players there that make it the biggest market in the world, but when Epic is screwed around like this on a public stage, it might just be enough to turn off future prospectives. I mean, were I in the sort of position to be making these choices I wouldn't be doing business with China anyway (because I have some sliver of self respect), but where I somehow already in such a relationship, this would be a big spook factor to convince me to look elsewhere.

We've seen some talented developers from Tencent leave the CCP bubble and market their talents to the wider rest of the world, and when you see the sort of evil eye of Sauron control which is being flaunted over there it's easy to see why. Total dominion over entrainment being exercised by a party who, as they've demonstrated historically and spectacularly, have proven at times to be utterly clueless with implementing these sweeping social reform measures, just sounds like a minefield of uncomfortable that no artist wants to have to deal with. Who wants to be toyed around for years and then be told that you're 'morally unfit' by a government body formed of unrepentant genociders? Oh is this blog getting a bit too heavy? You know I get this way when we're talking Chinese government, you can't say you weren't warned. Still, best I wrap this up before I start physically fuming onto my keyboard. This is stupid, it's further isolating Chinese entertainment from the rest of the world, but that's probably the point. Still, Epic suck too, so this story has no silver lining. The end.

MLK and Fortnite

 Your worst enemy is the man in the mirror.

Yeah I- I saw it. I saw Rick Sanchez and the Xenomorph ascend the stairs of victory and stand there, truly absorbing Martin Luthor King's iconic 'I Have a Dream' speech, and I thought: "Truly, we are all lost." Someone call Charlie and tell her to make 7 billion reservations at the Hazbin, because we're all going to hell for letting this happen. 'Fortnite celebrates Martin Luthor King'- what where we thinking? The second anyone heard that the news should have shot right up the top of leadership so that the appropriate measures, the switching off of the world's internet, could be taken. But instead we all just sat back and let it happen, like the morbidly curious monsters we all are, as Fortnite butchered their way through a serious history lesson and turned the American civil right movement into a joke. Well done Epic Games. No seriously, way to screw up in a way few other companies even so much as put themselves in danger of; truly you guys are the burning dumpster role models.

So for those who have remained blissfully unawares up until now, Martin Luther King's big celebration teaching day dropped for Fortnite a few days ago, nearly half a year after the annually scheduled Martin Luther King Day. (Maybe if they waited until 2022, it would have given the team time to reflect and realise how stupid of an idea this was) Obviously, even the only moderately cynical could see this was yet another step on Epic's road to total proliferation of the Fortnite brand. If they could get the public to regard Fortnite as a platform, not just for entertainment but for serious events of historical significance, then they could use that as a springboard to further mainstream appeal and maybe even finally turning Fortnite into a virtual social media platform, like they want. It's a move towards what people are labelling 'the Metaverse'; a combination of social interaction platform and simulated living space which takes up so much of your daily interaction that you almost never need to leave it. (So the Oasis from Ready Player One, basically.)

The problem should be fairly clear; Fortnite just isn't that universal enough to touch everyone and everything; it's a video game for goodness sake! Fortnite is about shooting things, first zombies, but more famously each other until literally no one else is alive; no matter what sort of event you hold in that world, that background will hover over everything. Epic have been trying, very hard, to try and change Fortnite into something more, and they've made greater strides than I think they have any right to, but they aren't there just yet. Do I mean to imply that with time Fortnite could become the one-stop shop for everything? I- really don't know. Maybe. I've mentioned it elsewhere recently, but we're already getting popular artists hosting concerts on Fortnite, director(s) hosting big movie premiers, an American presidential candidate made a custom map to campaign in Fortnite, and there's the big crossover they did with the biggest entertainment franchise of the past 10 years, Marvel. So they've got entertainment twisted around their little finger right now. Yet as recent events have shown, that doesn't mean they've got everything in the bag.

The first big problem was the idea itself existing, the next was how to do it respectfully in the knowledge that all the world would be watching. The event would simply play out as a tour across a virtual museum that would display all the key accomplishments of the civil rights movement, which players would explore together before ending with watching a broadcast of the 'I have a dream' speech whilst standing in a virtual version of the place where it happened. On paper it sounds fine. Respectful almost. But 'on paper' never translates 1:1, as anyone should have known from the get-go. Putting people in this situation was just begging them to find ways of screwing everything up, and so Epic were fighting against the unquenchable human thirst to just be terrible for the sake of being terrible. They weren't going to win!

To start with they needed to axe emotes, given the fact that previous events of music festivals were often fraught with disruptive emotes such as throwing tomatoes. (That would be a bad look) And so they disabled a few emotes. Then they disabled practically all emotes after discovering that pretty much every animatic they'd ever designed was a bad look for this supposedly serious event. All apart from the 8 designed for the event, which the team left accessible through the emote wheel. Unfortunately, that left a really rather simple exploit open where people could overwrite the contents of the Emote wheel and do whatever they wanted anyway. (But it's the thought that counts, right?) Even more hilariously (in a deeply dark way) Epic had made a deal with DC to implement some superhero themed emotes a while back, and the terms of the deal mean that they couldn't be deactivated. A big shame, considering Catwoman's emote was literally just the player summoning and cracking a black whip, complete with sound effects. (You can't make this stuff up.)

Of course, then there's just the general fact that all of this feels icky. I'm not sure about you, but I don't feel the 'goodwill' and 'desire to teach' emanating from Fortnite as they cover this event; I sense more just the rubbing of hands by Epic execs convinced that this one was going to be idea to score them all the good press points. The exact opposite happened, however, because of course it did; what where they thinking? Now Fortnite has provided it's own fuel to the fire of why their Metaverse idea is bad; because when you try to be everything, tonal dissonance ensues. And that's not even to mention the fact that this was a transparent attempt to commodify Martin Luthor King's legacy in order to springboard themselves higher, and in doing Epic really shone a light on the rather messy split between the owners of MLK's estate, his children. So they also managed to expose more ways in which greed has ruined and corrupted the wider world. Wow, Epic actually ruined my day as well. (They are prolific!)

Now I'm going to surprise no one by saying; I ain't no big fan of this whole "Metaverse" idea. At it's heart the very thing represents a monopoly and those are bad for creativity, but the idea is just so all-consuming that those who pursue it just lose all their personality and heart along the way. Take this PR disaster, which would be enough to make any company with an ounce of humility still left in it's rafters stop to reflect on how stupid their recent path has been. A backlash like this should have been the last we heard of Fortnite in the newspace for at least a month, whilst the team work on how to be better and ensure they're not stepping on any rakes going forward. But not Fortnite, no, they're too big to slow down! And immediately following this they stepped into another controversy with their 'Imposter mode' announcement; a rip-off of Among Us (a game made by an indie studio) with nothing added to the formula and even a map that is functionally identical to the base Among Us Spaceship. (I'm not sure if Epic is just shameless or clueless at this point.)

The term 'too big to fail' is an interesting one. It implies a point at which you're so horrendously huge that even the worst blunder of all time can't stop your hulking victories for that's simply the wake of your step, whilst simultaneously invoking the image of a venture so bloated, with so many people counting on you, that you simply cannot fail, the consequence would be too dire. Total invulnerability and utter vulnerability, married to the same side of the coin. It Epic want Fortnite to be their unstoppable titan, they need to acknowledge that nothing comes with impunity and everything falls. I plain don't think they had an inkling of the infrastructure to establish themselves like they want to, and they'll need to totally devote themselves as a company to Fortnite, if they want to avoid clear embarrassments like this in the future. Either that, or settle with just being the world's most popular video game pastime. But why settle for most of the world, when you can choke to death trying to swallow all of it?

Fortnite is unrecognisable

 Take a good hard look at your future Front Page

I imagine that at some point in your life, someday, you have played Fortnite, haven't you? It's okay to admit that, we've all been there; heck, the game didn't become the biggest in the world by being a gaming anomaly, and a high-quality free-game is hard to resist before the sweaty crowd descends upon it. (I mostly just assumed that crowd were always part of 'Call of Duty: Warzone' which is why I never played that) I'd even go so far as to say I had some fun playing that game in the thirty or forty games of it that I played before I grew bored with the formula, and the constant disappointment of losing, and moved back to more familiar pastures. So maybe I just didn't have what it takes to be a great Battle Royale player, I didn't have the perseverance and desire to prove myself. Typically, with games of this genre, I'd just work my way towards one victory and consider myself done with that Battle Royale entirely, and do it early in the game's lifecycle too so that it isn't too hard of a victory to win. (Yeah, I'm a bit of a coward) But we've all come to, and probably left Fortnite, for one reason or the other over the years; but I'm here to ask you, have you ever considered going back?

I say that because if you bit the bullet and hit that 'reinstall' button, you might be greeted to a longer download time than you suspected, which may just have piqued your curiosity to know exactly what has changed in the game of the youth. Firstly, I'm sure you're aware that games of this calibre live and die on their commitment to constant forward momentum, always adding updates and skins and things that keep players coming back and spending money. That is their life force and without it these games squander and are put-out-to-pasture. So as the kings of this genre, it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that Fortnite is hit with so many updates that even if you first played Fortnite one year ago or two, the face of what the game looks like now is probably nothing like what you had in memory. But even then, even understanding how this is a genre prone to constant unerring change, I posit that the Fortnite of today is utterly unrecognisable to the layman; and why that's amazing.

The first time I took a look back at this game was actually fairly recently, it was in response to that Ariana Grande digital concert which as far as I am aware is the second concert of it's type to touch this platform. (With the Travis Scott concert being the first) And of course in the light of the fact this has a predecessor it makes sense, but then when you expand a little beyond that you realise that nothing actually makes sense whatsoever. This is a Battle Royale game (or the Battle Royale addendum onto a base game which no one plays) where the heart of the gameplay loop is murdering everyone else in the map until you are the only one left standing, right? I mean, that's the very heart and soul of this genre and what it represents. So where does a concert fit into that vision? An audio-visual experience where you follow a 'Shadow of the Colossus' style rendering of Ariana Grande as she sings her way through psychedelic popping clouds and dream-like pink castles- what happened to the Battle Royale?

In truth it's pretty bare-faced; the Battle Royale element of this game has been swept away as the main focus of the studio. Not to say that isn't what their game still ostensibly is, that's something Epic have been unable to get away from, but it isn't the endgoal that Epic Games are shooting for. They've let it been known before, in investor calls, but it should be apparent from all of these special events anyway; Fortnite is a multimedia social world being built to be the future face of the internet. You know when you look upon the Matrix or 'The Oasis' and you wonder what a new digital world for humanity would look like in the real world? Fortnite is the answer, or so the Epic games imaginaries would have you believe. They want to make themselves a platform which combines all aspects of media smashed into one and they're doing it ingeniously by putting all the most popular iterations of popular media together and watching their dominance grow from that.

It started with the Marvel crossovers, okay that's not actually how it started, but Epic really set it's plan in motion through that crossover. The hugely successful team-up with the biggest movie franchise in the world that extended so far that Fortnite actually scored a cameo in Endgame. (I still can't believe that happened, what a trip) But even further than that, Fortnite stepped up to the plate in a time where the hugely successful Marvel franchise had no face on the video-game industry and created a limited-time mode for fans to come and play as Thanos, or beat him up as the Avengers. Talk about a brand boost! Piggybacking off 10 years of Disney franchise building to set yourself up as the official tie-in game, and you can bet that was sure to turn the heads of other huge entertainment properties who wanted that level of notoriety. They turned themselves from the underdog into the topcat with one simple collaboration; were only we all so lucky.

But what about the Fortnite of today? What does it look like in the years since? Well honestly the game feels nothing like a Battle Royale should, or at least a focused one. Firstly, there's a giant UFO floating over the map now, there are NPCs all across the map that fire at everyone and are usually tied to challenge modes. There are challenge instruments chucked haphazardly across the environment, with the most recent being phone boxes that people with the Clark Kent skin can use to turn into Superman. And most importantly there are skins from just about every franchise imaginable intersecting in a manner that would never have been even conceivable ten years ago. Batman and Captain America; the Mandalorian and Kratos; Deadpool and- Free Guy? The new Ryan Reynolds movie where he's just a guy in a blue suit? That made it into the game as a skin? Well actually they added the shirtless buff version of Ryan Reynolds from that movie, but it's still an example of how Fortnite has managed to cement itself as a staple of higher level marketing methods; an incredibly privileged position to sit within.

Nowadays playing a game of Fortnite can be about winning the match, but it can just as easily be about doing your own challenge hunting against NPCs in your own corner of the map whilst everything else happens around you. It can be about logging into the playground mode in order to mess around with custom maps that almost seem like they're trying to emulate the free creativity of Minecraft, Roblox or Dreams. It can be about watching the premier of a new movie at the ingame drive-in theatre. It can basically be about socialising and treating this space as an interactive social media metaspace; except one in which you happen to be stuck in a death arena with a bubble that shrinks forever on you. Does that makes sense to you? Because I'm still struggling to get to terms with it, but considering the vast proliferation of Fortnite that might just be another symptom of me getting old and losing that finger on the pulse of the popular. (If I ever had that finger to being with. I've always been pretty square in truth)

Many years ago I remember dreaming of, what in my mind, would be the greatest fighting game of all time. It would be a collaboration of all the properties imaginable, a free-for-all frenzy across a 3D map space with Street Fighter versus the cast of DC comics versus Dragonball versus Mortal Kombat versus Marvel versus Ubisoft properties. Just everything and everyone ripping into each other with wanton abandon. It was obviously a juvenile dream and even then I was stuck between picking how balancing could possible work when someone like Ezio Auditore went up against Marvel's Jack of Hearts and Goku. But even on a base level the idea would never work because licence holders would never play ball like that. Except I was wrong, because Fortnite has managed to become the exception to that rule and raked in the bucks because of it. (Now if only we had the world's most insane fighting game developers on the Epic Games staff my dream might have actually had a fighting chance.) Fortnite, for better or worse, has the potential to change the media landscape irrevocably, and I think we're just on the cusp of that potential. We're still in those early stages of the chess match as Epic position their key pieces on the board. The only thing I'm still trying to figure out is whether their ultimate plan will be a step up from the apocalyptic pissing match which makes our current social media spectrum, or something inconceivably more depraved. (Knowing our luck, I'm leaning towards the latter.)

Apple Vs Epic Vs 13 yr olds

Do us a favour and wipe out tomato town

Once you've finished listening to your fourteenth rendition of 'Chug Jug' you might send one up in prayer for the myriad of folk over in the fanbase for Fortnite, because a good many of them don't know what's going to happen to their favourite game. I mean, nothing's going to happen to it, so to speak; it's still the biggest game in the world and thus is hardly at the mercy of a slap fight like this, but certainly some of it's accessibility hangs in the balance. In fact, it doesn't really hang; it's been severed, and we're just waiting to hear whether or not it'll ever get patched up. This has really started to enter that fever pitch now that the actual trial has begun and we'll get to hear the possibly historic ruling on what Apple is allowed to do with their domination over their end of the mobile marketplace. Or, indeed, if that is even a domination at all. Legally speaking.

Of course, if everything I'm saying is fanciful nonsense to you, then here's a quick recap; Epic games have started a fight with Apple over the fact that Apple funnels developers into selling their apps soely through the Apple store and thus forces them to capitulate to, by Epic's definition, exploitative stipulations. A big cut of proceeds fly out of the pocket of developers and independent shops are strictly against TOS, every inapp purchase must go through Apple. Now for mobile developers this isn't too far from the ordinary, but console developers at least can start up a fuss about that cut, it's pretty bad compared to what's happening over on the rest of the industry. If Epic can prove what Apple is running is a monopoly, they could be looking at forcing the hand of Apple to change rules and improve the lives of App developers the world over, so Epic really is fighting on behalf of the little man here. (Even if it's not exactly for them) 

Unfortunately, with the state of the world right now, we won't be seeing these stuffy money vampires dragged out of their hovels and into suits for an in-person trial, which is a shame because I personally dislike both sides of this little debate and would love to see them sweat it out a bit.  (It's always funny watching these automatons try so hard to convince us they're still human and thus worthy of some sort of sympathy) In fact we're not even getting video interviews so can put a face to the vultures. Instead it's all just a telephoned-in conference with static voices in a dark abyss. How draconian. What is this: the nineteenfifties? I was specifically told that Video has committed some form of homicide against Radio; surely audio entertainment should be a dead art. Yet hear we are listening to poorly captured audio excerpts from journalists who called in keep track of deliberations, and to everyone involved's credit; it really was very entertaining.

For you see, instead of being treated to the mechanical fumbles of the court as they desperately tried to figure out how to get a three-way conference working, (software which has been in general circulation for over a decade now, but still people find ways to fudge it) we got the somewhat greater gift of courts who don't know how to run a listen-in call line. (In their defence, neither do I.) One reporter recalled being asked, through an automated system, upon calling in whether or not they wanted to join as a listener or an host. Just straight up, like that. And though they claimed to have chosen the righteous path from this choose-your-own-adventure minigame, it would appear there were a great many others far too tempted with the allure of unadulterated trolling. That's how a boring preliminary trail got interesting.

Steps like these are the basic of the basic, the formalities that make official what has already been discussed and disseminated at length through and from documents. Although they don't remain quite so standard and formal when you have voices from the random public chiming in to say things like, and I quote, "I would suck all of you to get back Fortnite mobile back". (Thank you, PCGamer, for making my day with that little gem) But that interruption wasn't an exception. People chimed in to scream things like "Bring back Fortnite on mobile please, Judge", "Free Fortnite" and, a wild card in the bunch, "Don't bring back Fortnite." Others just played Travis Scott songs, and one uninvited guest, during a moment of silence when the main lines went down and this lone fellow was suddenly struck with an almost divine moment of clarity, commented "I'm going to hell for this". Maybe; but you can tell Beelzebub how it was all worth it for this fleeting satisfaction!

Try as they might though, the hoards of thirteen year olds couldn't prematurely end this trial with an early win for Epic, and instead the court settled on the battlegrounds for what will shape up as a war of definitions. This here is going to be the Courts deciding if what Apple exerts over developers is monopolistic (and thus anti-competitive) or if they're operating well within their rights as the owner and creator of the infrastructure. (In order to remain consistent, Epic have filed a similar case against Google which will probably also get decided by this definition battle.) By Apple's reasoning what they do on this platform is no different from what Console developers do, and if Epic don't like it they are well within their capabilities to sell their game on another platform, thus proving Apple doesn't hold a monopoly. For the courts the key comes in deciding if they consider all platforms part of a single market, or if the definition of a market is narrower than that, thus trapping Apple. Quiet the genuine conundrum that I'm actually fascinated to follow, where would I fall on this from a purely legal approach? I truly do wonder.

Apple have something of an easier job in all this, they just have to make Epic look like incompetent bullies trying to strongarm their way into getting what they want. Which is... actually somewhat on the money. But that's still kind of the pot calling the kettle black, now ain't it? Epic may have founded it's store on trying to buy their way into gamer's hearts, but Apple have aggressively stamped out competition for years and remain one of the few still in the mobile business because of it. And yet, Apple wanted to use some negotiation between Epic and Sony over cross compatibility in Fortnite as their 'prime example'. In the correspondence, Sony threw a fit over the concept and wouldn't budge as Epic kept coming back with more and more concessions, showing, in Apple's eyes, how the guys won't take no for an answer and keep pushing until they hear what they want. Again, that's true; but it was Epic trying to push a stubborn mule to break ground which proved beneficial to the entire game's industry, so I really loathe this being weaponised against them. This is one of the few Epic stories I can unreservedly respect. (But how the courts will see it, I don't know)

There's ever this separation between the world of law and the world of... well, everyone else- and it makes legal entanglements like this delectably unpredictable. You never know which way the wind could be turning, and who's going to be stuck with egg on their face on the other end of this; because whilst I'm morally on the side of Epic here, they were the instigators and an offensive stance is inherently harder to win an argument on. At the end of the day, however, (and I know I come back to this often) this is two tech titans arguing over who can make the better pittance and neither really deserves their windfall; so though I await each development with a curious ear, I do so rooting for the indie devs out there. Let them get their cut for their hardwork, dammit, Apple you vampires!

Crossover Week

 Whoops, I slipped into the upside down timeline it would seem.

Who doesn't like a little bit of crossover action in their video games every now and then to break up the monotony? I mean you've got to get sick of staring at the same old mugs in the same old worlds all the darn time, why not switch it up and stick Batman in the Ironman suit? But moving away from the whole DC/Marvel crossover concept which I know riles some people up to even think about, what about when game franchises get to pop over the fence and see what their fellow series' are up to? Well, we get some of the coolest cross-over franchises of all time like Marvel vs Capcom, Kingdom Hearts and Super Smash Bros. It's a great way to envision otherwise rigid character roles in vastly different scenarios and set-ups wherein they can interact with others in ways that you might never have thought of in your wildest dreams. For example, who'd have thought that Goofy and Donald Duck would make such great battle friends in the war against the heartless? (Hmm? They're from the same- no way!) For me, I always love a little bit of a crossover time because it shows studio creatives shaking hands with one another and there really should be more of that across the art world in my opinion. However, that being said, even I have to admit that this past week has been a bit too much.

I'll never bemoan throwing franchises together every once and a while, but some sort of devil's bargain was pulled of these past few days because it's as though the magic boxes which contain all our favourite universes have just crumbled away and left us all in chaos. Not so long ago I thought that the most imaginative new crossover project I would see in modern years be the Final Fantasy XV crossover with Assassin's Creed. And to be fair that was absolutely wild, for a series that at least masquerades as being alternate history to crossover with a purely fantastical franchise, but I think some of last week's antics might be threatening to give even that the ol' run for it's money! I like to imagine the people who don't keep abreast of every development in the gaming world, like I do, and who might perhaps even be unfamiliar with the franchises being referenced. I'd love to see the reaction of a laymen to the Assassin's Creed Origin event where a fancy dressed Anime man teleports his way into a pyramid only to be chased out again by a gigantic flying knight with wings made out of swords. ("So which Egyptian myth was that again?")

Yet even with that sort of precedent, I myself am quite a bit taken aback by the event coming towards 'Power Rangers: Battle for the Grid', not least of all because that game was such a rudimentary fighting game easily outpaced by any of it's rivals that I didn't think it was worthy of receiving any support. I mean sure, the devs were going to take advantage of the lack of Power Ranger's games out there, mixed with the rabid fanbase, to fleece some overpriced microtransactions or two, that was a given. But why would any self respecting licence holder agree to having their brand associated with that sort of game/scheme? What's more, why the heck is the fighting game of the industry doing the crossover? That's right, Ryu and Chun Li from Street Fighter are actually suiting up as Rangers to get in on this game! (Hear that Jezebel? That's Chun Li from Street Fighter. Not Mortal Kombat.) This isn't even just skin jobs either. Both fighters have been given their own custom Ranger suits, which is a pretty big deal for fans, and their movesets are reminiscent of their Street Fighter appearances. Scrub my mouth out- but this actually looks like a well-executed Crossover coming to a game which may not deserve it. (How utterly weird)

But it get wilder. Because just as the gaming world was slowly trying to come to terms with the fact that was going to be happening and how we as a society failed to stop it, another crossover with a seriously questionable concept was announced. And I'm cheating with this one, because this isn't actually two gaming series' coming together at all. (Which does, in honesty, make it just a bit more odd.) For some incomprehensible reason fans of Rainbow Six Siege are getting Rick and Morty style skins added into the game. No, this wasn't announced a couple of weeks back on April 1st, this is apparently a real Collab. And want to know the worst part? One of the skin's is Pickle Rick. Oh god, the fifty year-old executives in the decision-room just learnt what memes are, but they're two years behind the curve anyway! That's right, the operative Smoke will be getting the Pickle suit (with Rat head) and a portal gun attachment whilst Sledge gets a Gromflomite uniform. Genuinely don't know what that second thing even is. Don't know if it's from a series I watched or if it came after I stopped watching because the community is the worst. (I should really finally catch up with Rick and Morty now that I'm reaching the end of Golden Wind- damn it, the crossover advertising worked!)

Yet of course that's not the end. Because what sort of 'Crossover week' would this be with only two crossovers? Pitiful numbers I say; Muda! What we also have to throw atop the pile is a crossover that at least makes a lot more sense, both conceptually and in timing, but still stands out to me because I just assumed this had already happened at some point in the past. Resident Evil announced a crossover with Dead by Daylight during their news blowout from the last week, but they've been pretty scarce on actual details like who's actually getting ported over. Now Dead by Daylight is actually no stranger to crossovers, with 'Stranger Things', 'Nightmare on Elm's Street', 'Halloween', 'Left 4 Dead', 'Evil Dead', 'Scary Movie', and 'Silent Hill' already in the rooster to boast about. Resident Evil might be seen as an inevitability. However, the question is what creature is coming this game's way to represent RE's finest; because there's actually a fair few to pick from. Mr X would be the obvious choice, given his reputation as the unstoppable stalker, but Nemesis certainly looks a lot more monstrous. And, if we really want to advertise the new game, may I suggest that perhaps Lady Dimitrescu and her glove/knife hand might make an appearance? Hey it was just a suggestio- what's that dog doing with that hammer? NO! Don't send me back to Horny Jail! I won't g- >Bonk<

And finally, to cap it all off, was a crossover which isn't really a surprise to anyone given that Fornite still holds the rights to crossover with literally anyone they point their fingers at. But even then, it's not as thought they announce a new crossover every week, they had to choose this period of crossover madness to reveal their 'Horizon: Zero Dawn' character crossover. Which served as a reminder to me that Sony are very willing to sell their character rights over to Epic, yet are desperately reticent on letting the actual games themselves get to the wider gaming audience. Yes, I did just turn this, otherwise unrelated, conversation into another complaint about how badly I want Persona 5 and Final Fantasy 7 Remake. Let not a week go by without my stating: Screw Sony. 

So that is at least four crossover events that all were announced at in this random week midway through April, and I can't be the only one scratching their head thinking there's some sort of Holiday I missed, can I? I mean, there's also the recently announced crossover with Dragon Raja (An MMO I've never heard of) and Evangelion, (A classic Anime that's getting an inexplicable resurrection soon) but somehow that didn't pop as well. And Illusion connect is crossing over with Zombie Land Saga- what the heck is going on! Am I crazy. Are hundreds of crossover events happening every other week and I've just never noticed it before? I feel like that can't be the case but all this is just too big of a coincidence, isn't it? The anomaly must originate from me!

I do love the idea of joining characters and franchises together in crossover events, even when it creates a godawful affront to god like that Pickle Rick skin. (I don't need to see that thing ever again, thank you very much) Where the stiff barriers that form our worlds of fiction broken down a bit more, I think it would make for a much more varied and inclusive eco-system where creators aren't forced to do wild things like steal a bunch of characters from other indie games under the knowledge that they'll never come after you because you're untouchable now. (I'm 90% the person who said that was joking when they did; but just in case they weren't I won't name them and let you look up for the quote for yourself.) However, I know that the sanctity of story telling and world building means that fictional worlds needs to contain some consistency to themselves, and so these crossovers must be rare and inconsistent. Unless it's this week, in which case they're freakin' everywhere.

Fortnite and Disney; The summer love story that just won't end

 Coming to a theatre near you!

So we haven't spoken about Fortnite for a hot minute, and that's because nothing has really come out of the "Biggest game in the world"(or, formerly, I guess, now that the age of 'Among Us' is here) since the advent of Chapter 2. Oh who am I kidding, tons has happened in Fortnite but it's all just been so far afield of the game that I used to casually play that it seems just wrong for me to try and immerse myself in this title that has been pushed so far outside my demographic. What started as a fun Battle Royale title has morphed into the early stages of this virtual social platform/ jack of all trades/ official Disney Marketing blimp which, on my more neurotic days, just shimmers with an air of 'Soulless machine' more than anything else. I mean, if Cyberpunk 2077 is a game about trying to save oneself from a world built and paid for by the cynical profit margins of shady megacorporations, than Fortnite is perhaps the exact opposite of surrendering yourself to them happily and engaging in their most intimate spaces. When you see all those mindless automatons in their 'happy state' with the VR pods, imagine Fortnite within their headset world and see how well the image fits.

But the good fortunes of the Fortnite creators mustn't be forgotten or diminished, because they have reached that golden level of pop-culture relevancy where their very name carries universal definition. Just like Minecraft, GTA or Call of Duty, no one is ever under any delusions about what you mean when Fortnite is bought into the conversation, and if the longevity of those other titles is anything to go by, I guess that means Fortnite is around to stay. (If you ever had any doubts about that.) One of the most transparent ways through which this fact has become obvious is in the way that the old guards of Entertainment have found themselves coming around to it's shores, like the music industry through Travis Scott and Marshmello. But perhaps the oldest of the giants who has settled themselves firmly with the Fortnite Kingdom is no longer than the sleeping beast of Disney, and that is a relationship that just fascinates me.

I hardly need to tell you, with it happening in one of the biggest movies of all time, but perhaps the first time there was any indication this fancy wasn't just passing and it would hold, it would have to be the scene in Avengers Endgame which featured Fortnite. How incredible, for a non-stock-composite game to feature in the highest grossing movie of all time; I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during that conference call. (Which windowless room full of stuffy executives erupted with more excitement over the prospect? I genuinely can't decide.) And as if that wasn't enough, Fortnite themselves held Avengers themed events over the release of the two movies which was a close enough marketing tie to actually warrant the use of Thanos in their game, even when Thanos was at the height of the storytelling! (Note how remarkable this is because old school marketing heads generally hate having their characters portrayed anywhere else simultaneously because they're all so far out of touch it isn't even funny.)

However, since those crazy times the Marvel Cinematic Universal has wound itself down for a while in order to give everyone a sufficient enough break not to become too sick with Marvel movies and you'd be forgiven for expecting Fortnite's collaboration with Disney properties to do the same, except nope. Fortnite manged to team up with Disney again for a 'Star Wars The Last Jedi' celebration, proving that theirs is a love written in the stars. If things progress like this it won't be long before all these big clueless companies begin looking about Fortnite as the 'front page' of gaming (provided that they don't already) and flood the game with their offers. Of course, in such a situation I'd imagine the buck would fall with Disney and how they feel about the prospect of open relationships, but I'm sure Fortnite will always find room for everyone else somewhere in their vacuous maw.

What really drove me to make this blog was actually something that happened really recently with Fortnite, in relation to the sort of events they were conducting in the here and now. Right in the middle of this new Galactus themed Fortnite story arc (yet again, Marvel is more active in Fortnite than in the movie world right now) they launched an initiative involving 'Hunters' and a collection of really enticing looking skins and such. At the head of all these, however, is a face that should be familair to anyone who's had interest in Disney of late, because it's the actual Mandalorian. That's right! The Mandolarian, or Din 'no one cares we're calling him Mando anyway' Djarin, and Baby Yoda, or I-refuse-to-call-him-that, have come to the world of Fortnite and it's their Season 2 iterations to top it off. (You can tell by the Mudhorn emblazoned on Mando's shoulder) And I for one am struggling to put my indignation into words.

"'Indignation', you say?" Why yes I do, because bare in mind, dear reader, that these are the single most popular characters to come to the Star Wars world since... Well, Ashoka Tano. These are literal super stars in the Star Wars landscape, and yet their first (and so far only) foray into the world of gaming hasn't been through a tie-in to an official Star Wars game, but through a Fortnite brand deal! Their first game! I honestly thought that Battlefront would get in on the action back when the first series was still around, but at that stage the team were busy wrapping things up in terms of new content so they couldn't quite manage it. Instead the golden goose of Fortnite gets to lay the golden egg and have Mando themed content installed, and I'm starting to worry that this might be a prelude to the sort of direction that Disney is heading in when it comes to the licencing of their ludicrously valuable properties.

Most in gaming remember how Disney squeezed themselves out of the gaming market after their own inhouse studios couldn't manage to score a decent hit, and since then they've had to make do with licencing out their games. Most contentious of which was the decision to licence exclusively to EA for what feels like ever, but their other titles have been around the place. Square Enix, through Kingdom Hearts, still has access to Disney original content, but that may be starting to change all because of a little game called Avengers. Now bear in mind that this is just my personal interpretation of Disney's actions, but I think I've got a decent grip of things. So Disney, recognising the great relationship they share with Square, probably thought it safe now to start diversifying their marketing through the game industry and thus authorised a persistent platform for Marvel marketing through 'Avengers', a game that was destined to do well because of the attached name. Yet now that things have gone the other way and Square's Avengers has not only failed to cement itself in pop culture but also hasn't managed to generate a profit yet; (as of the making of this blog) that is seriously going to shake Disney's confidence. My suspicion is that their relationship with the tried and true Epic games is only going to grow as Disney leans on them more and more, and in doing so we'll start to see ever less of our favourite, now Disney owned, franchises in the gaming world. The name is just too big to risk failure now.

Maybe just seeing the Mandalorian pimped out in this unceremonious attempt to sell battle passes is what's standing out to me here. There seems to be a lot of dignity imbued in him that's hard to play out on the stage of Fortnite, and that might be my own bias speaking but I believe it none the less. As a lifelong Star Wars fan it's no surprise that all I really want is a space to live out my Scoundrel fantasies, and Fortnite just doesn't really pull that off me, so I guess fans like me are SOL for this new phase of Disney property management. Only Spiderman is really safe to still make it to imaginative and risk-taking game fronts because that's lucky enough to have Sony backing, who's to say what the future holds for Star Wars. I'd imagine, however, that given the strength of their partnership, Fortnite's going to be taking a lot of Disney's gaming firsts for the forseeable future.

Epic V Apple: Dawn of Pettiness

Do Apples bleed?

Yes, that's right there's been one more major development in the real life Anime duel between the Grey fruit and the gaming's premium mircotransaction dairy cow. And this does have the potential to be the last major update for a long while due to the disappearance of this case to the Phantom Zone, otherwise known as courts, meaning this duel will go the way of every Dragon Ball Z fight and get itself ballooned to the length of months when it all could have been solved in the twenty minute mark. (Damn you, Filler gods!) So whilst Apples prepares it's darkest arts and squares itself with the sacrifices it will take, Epic prepares it's spirit-bomb and must call upon the aid of his allies for their contribution, and I cannot miss this opportunity to look them over one last time and see what becomes of the world's most dangerous game: Corporate scuffles.

So maybe you've been keeping abreast of everything or maybe you haven't, either way; here's your regularly scheduled recap. Last time on 'Epic X Apple': Elders of the Epic clan decide that they've had enough of spending the 30% commission that one is required to commit in order to display goods on Apple-san's markets, prompting a brazen move on Epic's part to publicly declare a complete circumvention of Apple's Market place, specifically for their most promising product; Fortnite. Unfortunately, this breaks the ancient pact signed long ago between the two clans, providing the impetus for war between the old frenemies. Does the Epic-clan stand a chance against the might of the Apple empire? Will their court injunction be enough to stop the Apple clan for going straight for the kneecaps? And will any of the other clans have the bravery to step up and stand with Epic? Find out on this week's episode of 'Epic X Apple'! 

So the cliffhanger from last time was really where it was the most heated in this fight. Apple had decided to kneejerk against Epic in the most hardcore way and threatened to remove Epic's developer account in the Apple ecosystem, a move which would cut off all of Epic's software from the store, including 'Unreal Engine'. (The most popular game engine in the world next to Apple's own Unity.) This would essentially make any game developers on the Apple store incapable of updating their apps and utterly freeze their development efforts. Now on one hand this would really be a shot-in-the-foot to Apple because they'd be screwing over a lot of their own developers who had nothing to do with this back and forth, but they were betting it would hurt Epic a lot more due to the loss of trust they'd undergo as being the 'instigator' of this fight. Naturally, this dirty tactic was frowned upon by the parties involved and Epic sought out a court injunction to prevent Apple from making this bold move. Well the results are in and the court says; Apple is not allowed to bring this private scrap between the two companies into the ecosystem of the entire Apple market just for a power move. This started as a petty bar-room brawl, that's how it should end.

So quite a blow to the Apple camp right away; who knows how they will ever recover from this? But the hits to the gut just keep coming, it would seem, as no sooner had that news started doing the rounds that a new contender entered the ring to confirm their support for the underdog in this fight; Epic. Microsoft, famed Apple competitors, roused their sleeping selves recently when they heard about the drastic measures Apple threatened to take and came out in condemnation of Apple's practises. They argued, as the Courts ultimately ended up ruling, that Apple were overreaching in attempting to kill off Unreal just to strong-arm Epic, and cited their own racing game 'Forza' for mobile, as potential collateral in all of this. So on one hand they've said nothing that everybody doesn't already know, (they didn't even touch on the 30% commission issue as Mircosoft charge something similar.) but on the otherhand it makes for attention grabbing headlines and certainly does paint Apple as the greedy dictatorial overlords that Epic needs them to appear to be in order to win this battle of cultures.

As a consequence of all this, the heads over in the Apple camp have had a distinct change of pace when it comes to how they wanted to handle this, and it's pretty much an inalienable invitation to legal war. You see, when Epic first received a limp glove-slap across the face, with the removal of Epic from the Apple store, it was done with the stipulation that as soon as Epic swallowed their damn pride and came crawling back to Apple's standards, everything could go on as normal. Of course, with how transparently orchestrated this whole affair was it's obvious that Epic wasn't going to go for such an easy L. 'They're not that weak-willed'. This tactic of "We'll slap you around, but you can come back home at any time" continued for a long while, up until Saturday where Apple, the mile long ship, cottoned into the obvious fact that Epic were in this for the long haul. (Duh!) That day, Apple terminated Epic's app store account, making it so that Epic can publish and support no more games on the Apple infrastructure. Chilling indeed.

What started off as a very robotic exchange of documents has evolved into what feels like a very emotional charged and personal anime, and I for one have no idea where it plans to go from here. On one hand you'd think that there isn't any chips left to lay on either side but on the otherhand there is a huge number of other developers on the Apple platform that stand to gain if this 30% commission is successfully clapped back against, or if Apple are forced to concede a second marketplace on the Apple infrastructure. (Which I feel is Epic's ultimate plan.) The only question is how many of those devs are willing to risk biting the hand that feeds them in order to fight for their own well being; as this is certainly a high-risk, high-reward proposition. It's in everyone's interests to be on the right side of history here.

It is quite amusing, sitting as a fellow with no stakes one way or the other, to watch Epic prostate themselves as the Jesus of small-time developers when they are themselves a violently rich corporation. Apple took the time to point that out themselves, their store had helped greatly shore up Epics funds but now they've suddenly decided they are too good for Apple and thus need to go their own way. It's hypocrisy that a lot of people fall far, though one might argue that it might be good in the long run if Epic can force their way onto Apple devices and start offering their patented 15% commission. But then, why in the world would Apple ever wantonly agree to be undercut by a competitor on their own devices? Does any court actually have the power to force Apple to self-sabotage like that? And if Epic win this fight, who will they go up against next? How long before they turn on Microsoft and Sony to start forcing their way onto console stores? Epic is essentially kid Goku right now, ever ready to fight bigger folk around them and push further than one would think possible, but make no mistake they will turn into the mega-corporations they apparently 'oppose' if they get their way. It's the circle of corporate life.

The breaking up of major tech companies is something that needs to be done and sooner rather than later, but this should be in the effort to cut down on monopolies rather than to make way for a new, potentially bigger, one to take it's place. Now I'm not claiming that Epic has some sort of deep-seeded design on total global market domination or anything (at least, not to any degree of commitment which could make me legally liable) but I worry for the precedent they work to set in the very near future. I'm no economist, I can't speak for the wide-spread commercial ramifications or benefits for the world that Epic is attempting to pave they way for, I just know that from a consumer level this spells a level of impending inconvenience that I'm becoming increasingly uncomfortable with as the age of data-supremacy descends across the globe. Am I sounding like a paranoid old lady over the fact that Epic want to get their software on my phone, computer, console, fitbit and pace-maker? Maybe. But I'd rather be a pearl-clutcher than a blind fool who reacts several years too late.

Fortnite: Vs the world

Let's get read to rumble

Something's happening here, and what it is, ain't quite clear. The gauntlet has been officially thrown and now the world's most recognisable game of all time; Epic Games' Fortnite, and two of the biggest tech companies in the world; Apple and Google, are going to war. I mean- doesn't that just sound like the most epic anime showdown of all time? It's like Goku vs Broly, Jotaro vs Dio, Aang vs Ozai, Spongebob vs Squidward; all those times 1.3 trillion. (Apple's estimated value at the time of this writing, for reference.) For a game as big as Fortnite to be cast as the underdog in any situation is eye-turning enough, but for it be in a duel to the death against Apple, I'm sorry but it's popcorn and Marshmallows time. I'm straight itching to watch these titans tear each other apart in the court of law. I'm only sad that it's seemingly impossible for both sides to lose the lawsuit. (Is it? I dunno, LegalEagle hasn't uploaded a video on this yet...)

So you've already heard the news right? Sure you have; but I'm starting from the beginning because I just love to tell a story, even better when it's non-fiction. First off, we have to talk about how App stores work. (I know, exciting stuff) So if you're interested in getting into the ludicrously lucrative world of making a app for mobile devices, you'll have to get used to the fact that it'll be sold on someone else's storefront. Whether you're on IOS or Android, it's a well known truth that you have to play by the rules of Apple or Google respectively in order for your app to sell to the millions of folk around the world with a mobile device. On Android there is the choice to offer your app directly, but it still won't get as much traffic as it would on the Google store installed in most phones, and on IOS you literally cannot use a non-Apple-approved app. (Unless you jury-rig your device, but I don't want to get into that right now.) So basically, the default mobile stores are the toll keepers that every app developer must pay in order to get where they need to, due to the solitary nature of the devices there's no direct competition, and all the bargaining chips are situated solely in the mega tech companies' court. So as you can imagine they exploit the hell out of it and charge a 30% commission on all in-app purchases.

30% is a pretty heft kick to the groin for anyone to get over, and when it's in a nonnegotiable format such as sitting in the hands of a monopolistic entity- well, it's hard not to feel taken advantage of. I mean, that's like if Steam were to start charging 30% commission in order to sell your games on thei- oh wait, they do charge that. (And we wonder why Epic came along...) Obviously, as this is such a bitter pill for the companies to swallow, they practically invariably refuse to eat that cost themselves and instead pass it onto the customers, so that's why things tend to cost a lot more on mobile apps than on the website. (The more you know.) What's more, Apple's terms of service forbid developers from redirecting traffic away from the Apple store in order to circumvent commission, which leads to situations such as with Netflix's mobile app wherein you simply cannot subscribe through the app. They don't tell you why or where you need to go, they just expect you to figure it out. (Luckily Netflix has the brand familiarity to do that, whereas many other brands simply do not.)

It is within this ecosystem and under the purview of these rules that Epic Games chose to function in order to offer the mobile version of their popular Battle Royale; Fortnite. All the game was missing was portability, and with this release came a whole new wave of player engagement and retention for the folks over at Epic to enjoy. Que the claims of Fortnite addiction gripping the youth due to it's accessibility and the, much-more-real, issue of kids playing Fortnite in class with their phones. (I wasn't even allowed my phone in class, what's up with that?) So it was a successful move into a new market, good for them, let's fast forward to today. Not too long ago Fortnite decided to surprise the world with a shocking announcement; the in-game premium currency, V-bucks, would be granted a permanent 20% reduction in price. (Which, seeing as how this is in-game currency who's value is determined solely by Epic games, is pretty much meaningless when you think about it.) So far so nothing, but there was a little change up to the way that the mobile app demonstrated this deal. You see, whereas everywhere else folk would be treated to the discounted price, on mobile they would be greeted with two prices, the original one and the new one, with the more expensive option labelled 'Apple App store'. It was basically Epic showing people an obvious choice and saying "Which would you pick?"

That's ballsy one might say, very alpha; but also completely and undeniably against the rules that everyone else abides by. Thus it was pretty much inevitable that this little stunt would end up with Fortnite getting justly booted from the app store post haste, probably whilst Apple were scratching their heads and going "What did they think would happen?" But 'Oh! You fell into my trap card, Kaiba!', Epic muttered as within moments of getting pulled from the app store they were granted the legal precedent to clap back. Hardly a few minutes after the fact there was a video uploaded to Youtube retelling the classic 1984 parody advert that Apple made in their genesis, only this time with Apple as the grey tyrannical entity and the colourful cast of Fortnite as the liberators. (Very crass and on-the-nose there Epic. Do not approve.) As well as, in a move with a little more weight, a lawsuit filed against Apple by Epic for unfair practises. (Big moves!)

So obviously this whole affair was orchestrated to the nines, with Epic being their same slimy, sneaky selves in order to lure Apple into granting them the basis for a lawsuit. (As their claims wouldn't be nearly as strong without having been personally affected by Apple's policies) But if we ignore the grossly deliberate way that Epic planned all this out, there's an interesting conflict here which has the potential to touch a lot of people. They allege that Apple's iron fist on who gets on their phones is in direct contrast to healthy competition and thus grounds to be forcibly penalised within a court of law. Whatsmore, in offering themselves up as lambs to the slaughter here, Epic have managed to rally App developers behind a shared interest (getting this extortionate commission rate lowered) as well as Apple's customer base. (As There's sure to be plenty of kids absolutely distraught about not being able to play Fortnite for the forseeable future.)

The lawsuit, which was penned suspiciously legible to non-lawyers, feels catered to be as much an impassioned speech as the end of a crappy melodrama as a declaration for legal war. They even make a point to call out Apple's apparent hypocrisy as being a company that said it stood against the stifling of innovation only to become that behemoth all these years later. (Hence the eye-roll inducing Youtube video.) I feel as though the scope of their transgression did get a little bit out of their control, however, as Google also booted them off the playstore, leading to a much less flowery and little more delayed lawsuit thrown Google's way too. So does Fortnite stand a chance? Maybe. Afterall, we are in a political environment of folk who all seem to talk about breaking up the big tech companies, could this be a prime excuse to take a swing at that? We'll have to keep an eye out to see if any independent parties start weighing in on this matter, as I think this has the potential (and I'm sure this is what Epic is going for) to become much bigger than a simple commission dispute. This could be the start of the major curbing of Apple's growth.

So this very much is a David vs Goliath level showdown here today. A real Zuko vs Azula, Joseph vs The Pillarmen, Yugi vs Kaiba, Finn vs The Lich King, situation. (Did Finn ever actually go up against the Lich king? I can't remember.) Now don't get me wrong, there are no heroes in this tale to rally behind. Epic definitely broke the rules in order to fuel this lawsuit, and they're 40% owned by Tencent, so one could construe this as an attack on American business' through a Chinese proxy. But I'm sure Epic would deny that and spout some nonsense about them 'fighting for equality and freedoms' whilst simultaneously smothering the PC marketplace with exclusivity culture, so I'll not accuse anything formal. (You're a real class act, Epic.) At the end of the day, however, when you strip everything away this is just one mega rich corporation taking a swing at another, and in that light I think it's hardly controversial to say 'screw the lot of them and I hope this somehow ends off turning sour for all parties'. But if that, admittedly unlikely, scenario never happens, then I'm fine to just sit back and watch the fireworks like the stereotypical car-crash-watcher that I am.