Oh god, please no. The day they remove Office, I'm going back to PC laptops. The spreadsheets I get at work are way too complex for iWork.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Removes Subscription-Based iPad Gaming App from App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh god, please no. The day they remove Office, I'm going back to PC laptops. The spreadsheets I get at work are way too complex for iWork.
What is it about Apple Fanboys that makes them throw around the word "HATE" so much. I am an Apple user, and because I dislike some of their policies somehow fanboys equate that as the human emotion of "HATE"....
HATE: "to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward; detest: to hate the enemy; to hate bigotry".
So because a person doesn't mindless accept All of Apple's CRAP (and a lot of it is CRAP), they are bigots, hostile, and HATERS....
Learn to use the word correctly LTD. I neither LOVE not HATE any inanimate object (or company). Your post is silly.
The app didn't do anything, that's why!
Big Fish misses a huge point... the app didn't do anything. You could download it, but you couldn't use the service at all. The user was told they weren't accepting new subscriptions and to keep trying back.
The reviews are flooded with 1 stars and complaints about this, and I'd bet that's why Apple yanked it. I'm sure there's probably some clause about your app having to work or offer the content it claims to be in the store.
It would be like Conde Naste suddenly saying, you can download our magazine apps, but not any magazines.
Apple is probably being flooded with customer complaints.
Big Fish was stupid for releasing something that no one was allowed to use.
Big Fish misses a huge point... the app didn't do anything. You could download it, but you couldn't use the service at all. The user was told they weren't accepting new subscriptions and to keep trying back.
The reviews are flooded with 1 stars and complaints about this, and I'd bet that's why Apple yanked it. I'm sure there's probably some clause about your app having to work or offer the content it claims to be in the store.
It would be like Conde Naste suddenly saying, you can download our magazine apps, but not any magazines.
Apple is probably being flooded with customer complaints.
Big Fish was stupid for releasing something that no one was allowed to use.
That sounds more like a better reason than anything else mentioned on this thread
You are correct, still the most profitable... doesn't change the fact that the "free to play" MMO trend is growing... Even WOW has had to adapt to this and has gone "free to play"... until level 20.
Indeed, the tide is turning!
Last edited:
You are correct, still the most profitable... doesn't change the fact that the "free to play" MMO trend is growing... Even WOW has had to adapt to this and has gone "free to play"... until level 20.
Indeed, the tide is turning!
I wish, I really want to play the new Star Wars MMO but I don't see it going to free2play for a long while
I wish, I really want to play the new Star Wars MMO but I don't see it going to free2play for a long while
There's a few other MMOs i wish would go free to play also - Eve for example. I wouldn't play EVE enough to justify the monthly subscription.
To make this on topic - I can see that subscriptions for games would work if say, $5 would get you a week / month access to a host of games ( like BF )- a kind of try before you buy. If you like a game then buy it outright.
Hahaha, had a good read
----------
Same, I cancelled my WoW account for that reason
Apple communication skills are pretty good... At least for Apple.
"if you have nothing wise to say, don't say it."
Much much better than coming up with some corporate BS and then having to back-pedal and spiraling into ineptitude.
You're right, the consumers who play World of Warcraft don't care about subscription games.
I, for one, welcome our new arbitrary overlords.
You know, it doesn't matter how much they sell or don't sell. A little transparency would be nice, for the programmers as much as the end users. No one's asking that they change the entire process. It obviously works, as mysterious as it is. But that's the thing. Why is it mysterious? Why does Apple insist on just letting it be known that the app was pulled, but not talking about the reasoning behind it?
From what I hear, the process is basically this..
"Why was our app pulled?"
"Your app was pulled because it violates our terms."
"...And what terms would those be?"
"...Our terms. That's all you need to know."
Wouldn't it be better if it went like this...
"Why was our app pulled?"
"Your app was pulled because of that naked boob that pops up when you score a combo."
"Oh, okay. We can fix that, no problem."
...and then Apple could make a list of the reasons why an app was rejected, maybe even post up a document of their approval process, so other app developers can use it to compare and contrast their app to see if it violates any terms. Wouldn't that just make SO much sense?
It's a damn store. Not a secret society, where membership is bought with a tithe in blood. It wouldn't hurt Apple if they were a little more open about some things.
With the exception that WoW is a sprawling epic which is constantly being updated and improved and one could easily sink hundreds if not thousands of hours into it.
May be what you hear but doesn't mean that's the thruth.
It's very rare, if it happens at all, that the developer is left without a clue as to why his app was rejected.
What usually happens is that developers disagree with Apple's assessment, but there's even an appeals board too.
MMOs are a different type of subscription gaming. Blizzard has 20,000 servers and millions of people playing together at one time. A subscription to that kind of service makes sense.
In contrast... I wouldn't pay $5 a month for Angry Birds or some memory match game...
I'm talking Apple Eco System. If you want to be part of it , you follow their rules. There are others to develop for. They tried to sneak in something and were caught..IMO.
WoW and Blizzard are a completely different Ecosystem. Comparing Apples to Syndragosa's Tears.
I second that. It doesn't seem like Big Fish is completely innocent in this story. They knew they were bending the AppStore rules with their subscription system; and took advantage of what appears to be a slight dysfunction in Apple's organization. Looks like some Apple staffer took a decision that's beyond their paycheck. It's notorious that pricing policies inside Apple's various stores are viewed as strategic for the company. With a case like this, a reasonable business would seek the blessing from Eddy Cue if not Tim Cook himself.
Another possibility is that there are patent ramifications (stuff like the Lodsys problem) that were overlooked, causing Apple to back off and clarify.
But Apple clearly needs to take steps towards making the App approval process rock-solid.
Excellent - some posts simply don't need <sarcasm> tags - they're so obviously parodies or off the wall.
You're getting down-voted though. I wonder if that's due to open-minded people not recognizing the sarcasm, or the religuous right objecting to it....
Wow.
LOL....
No, I didn't - I don't believe in fairy tales.
NEVER happens like this. We have over 60 apps in the store with several that were rejected at one point.
Rejections ALWAYS come with detailed explanations as well as an opportunity to discuss any issues with the reviewer, his manager, and an appeal process.
Do you also develop apps for Android? How would you compare the admission process in two ecosystems?
Better Safe than Sorry...
I personnaly think Apple does a better job then Google when screening submitted Apps. Though this may be regarded as borderline dictatorship, it saves clients the hastle of dealing with buggy/low performance apps.
Yet communicating Apple's concerns regarding subscription based gaming might alleviate reactions towards this issue.
And regarding:
I'm also LMAO...
Brenkh
I personnaly think Apple does a better job then Google when screening submitted Apps. Though this may be regarded as borderline dictatorship, it saves clients the hastle of dealing with buggy/low performance apps.
Yet communicating Apple's concerns regarding subscription based gaming might alleviate reactions towards this issue.
And regarding:
I'm also LMAO...
Brenkh
I'm not sure there is any real screen process. We've submitted apps with critical flaws that went right into the store - even though they failed catastrophically. My development manager actually hates Android as we tend to have to remove capabilities that work great on iOS and don't work on Android well enough to leave them in.
It has a way to go before its as solid as iOS. I'm sure it will get there, but it has a way to go. Software piracy issues have led us to not port a number of games, and we are likely to use an ad based revenue model because of the wide redistribution of purchased apps by pirates.
My 10c says Big Fish's app will return once Apple's legal have revised the Developer Terms & Conditions.
The current language is probably too biased towards magazine publishing, and they want to make sure games (and other apps) are covered by it in detail.
This is Apple we're talking about after all. Leave no stone left unturned...
----------
Generally perhaps, but they're not impervious to mistakes. We submitted an app update not long ago that was approved within 24 hours (we were stunned, frankly). We then discovered that a bug in the AppStore build (an SDK bug apparently) prevented the player from getting past the main menu screen (touch inputs were screwed).
So I'll not hear any "Apple test rigourously" arguments today, since depending on who's doing the reviewing, the policy could be reduced to "does it run?".
The current language is probably too biased towards magazine publishing, and they want to make sure games (and other apps) are covered by it in detail.
This is Apple we're talking about after all. Leave no stone left unturned...
----------
Generally perhaps, but they're not impervious to mistakes. We submitted an app update not long ago that was approved within 24 hours (we were stunned, frankly). We then discovered that a bug in the AppStore build (an SDK bug apparently) prevented the player from getting past the main menu screen (touch inputs were screwed).
So I'll not hear any "Apple test rigourously" arguments today, since depending on who's doing the reviewing, the policy could be reduced to "does it run?".