5 ms·

If you think Apple's app store policies are ambigious, try Nintendo's

sgoraya 17y ago
That was a fun read of an NES game submission...but to compare that with Apple's app store is out of place. Different era, different type of hardware, distribution model, etc. etc. I've submitted games to NOA for the Gameboy Advance and Gamecube - out of the big 3 (NOA, SONY, MS), Nintendo had the most stringent requirements (not as bad as the article though). I enjoyed the article nonetheless.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
- nathanb 17y ago
  Aw, man, I thought this post had the potential to be interesting. Why'd you have to go and Godwin's Law it?
  - j23tom 17y ago
    ehh didn't knew that. But my point was that both: apple's (control everything) and nintendo's policies are simply evil.
    - yan 17y ago
      Saying their policies are "simply evil" completely undermines what it means to be evil.
      - j23tom 17y ago
        maybe not the best words but ... policy to control everything is simply evil. What Apple is doing (kills concurrence) is evil in the purest sense of word 'evil'
        cubicle67 17y ago
        everybody like to control things. You'd like to make Apple run their store differently, wouldn't you? Perhaps if you had the power to do so you'd like to force them to? Perhaps you'd like to control how they do things? Just to make sure it's done fairly, of course. but seriously, I think your exposure to evil has been pretty limited. What's the worst Apple will do to someone who violates its rules? Remove their app and refuse to deal with them again? pfft! In the scale of things we humans do to each other, that's almost angelic treatment
        jsz0 17y ago
        I think we need to make up a new word for it. If Apple's policies are evil what is genocide? rape? torture? Obviously I don't think you're putting them on the same ethical level just illustrating the problems of this type of rhetoric.
        j23tom 17y ago
        People here use strong words when it comes to criticize MS. They say how bad MS is and on the other hand how 'cool' is Apple. Isn't that hypocrisy ?
  - RevRal 17y ago
    On Godwin's Law from Wikipedia: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." Now I'm really interested to know what he said. I'm guessing he made some comparison between Nintendo, Apple, and, of all things, the Third Reich?
nathanb 17y ago
Nintendo no doubt knew that they had to establish itself in the minds of parents as kid-friendly (though ironically, these days it seems like they're trying to shake the image of the 'kiddy console'). I wonder if a similar statement extends to Apple. Perhaps they're trying to establish themselves as being idiot-friendly, or at least clueless-user-friendly. Makes me wonder if the irony also applies and they will eventually have to go to great lengths to shake the image of being too dumbed down.
MrRage 17y ago
That may be true but no Nintendo console has been hailed as the future of computing. They're just game consoles.
- patio11 17y ago
  My mother, who survived a stroke five years ago, spends an hour a day doing physical rehabilitation on her Wii. Her doctors say it has helped her balance, coordination, and confidence. It is the cheapest intervention that has produced the most improvement in her life, and by extension the lives of my whole family. Not bad for a game console.
  - pw 17y ago
    "It is the cheapest intervention that has produced the most improvement in her life" Amazing. What games is she using?
chadaustin 17y ago
Somewhere on Keith Boesky's games industry analysis blog ( http://boesky.blogspot.com/ http://boesky.blogspot.com/ ) he draws a parallel between Nintendo's and Apple's "slightly open" marketplaces. During the games industry crash in the 80s ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_video_game_crash_of_1983 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_video_game_crash... ) there were a glut of low-quality products, causing consumers to turn away from video games. Nintendo entered the scene with a restrictive game approval process - remember the Nintendo Seal of Quality? - reducing the number of games while increasing their quality. In effect, he argues a "slightly open" marketplace rebuilt consumer confidence and raised the Nintendo platform's value. If you look at the App Store today, there is a closed loop between the iPhone consumer marketplace, app developers, and the App Store platform. Apple's permeable nozzle on app submission increases the value of the platform while leaving most of a free market in place. This draws consumers, increasing the value to app developers. In short, a slightly-restricted platform can be good for everyone. I wish I could find the specific article. Keith Boesky is a little tl;dr but quite insightful. I'd love to hear counterarguments too.
- wvenable 17y ago
  I wish they still had the Nintendo Seal of Quality -- there is a flood of crappy games available for the Wii (and similarly the Gamecube before it). Those seriously hurt Nintendo's brand. The worst part of Apple's approval process is that it does very little to improve the quality of the apps. The crap still gets approved if it satisfies Apple's limited criteria. It's pretty clear the benefit for the approval is for Apple and not the consumer.
- _delirium 17y ago
  Does Apple's approval process actually have that effect, though? The feedback I'm hearing from game devs is the exact opposite of that with Nintendo: Apple lets basically anything through, so long as it doesn't run afoul of a few specific criteria (no porn, no embedded scripting, etc.), regardless of quality. That makes the marketplace as a whole sort of a sludge of junk where it's hard to differentiate yourself--- in contrast to Nintendo's WiiWare, which only releases games that Nintendo considers good enough.
- 17y ago
mortenjorck 17y ago
My, how things have changed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFNJfDGSZp0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFNJfDGSZp0 Yes, that character at the end gets stabbed through the skull with a sign post.
- Batsu 17y ago
  To provide an earlier example (2001): Conker's Bad Fur Day (NWS for language, I guess): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0w5neFPat1w http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0w5neFPat1w Pretty much anything you can find out about that game is along the same lines.
- chaosmachine 17y ago
  I'm not sure that's significantly more violent than MK2 which was on the SNES back in 1993. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucBGKcD78iY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucBGKcD78iY
jrockway 17y ago
Exactly; closed systems suck. There's a reason why there are only a handful of good NES games but that there are thousnads of good PC games.
ajg1977 17y ago
While both are stringent and designed to protect consumers, I'm not sure there are many other parallels between the processes of Apple and Nintendo. As a developer who's gone through the process of submitting games many times to Nintendo, these are why it's a far better process than Apple have. (Note these all apply to Sony/Microsoft too). 1) You can send Nintendo a proposed game design before starting any work and they will approve/deny it. Depending on how much detail you provide, you may only get a conditional approval, but you can submit more information or revisit later in development. If your game never stands a chance of being published, you'll have wasted nothing more than the time to create the documents. 2) If Nintendo have a problem with your game, they will tell you exactly what the issue is. There's no ambiguous reference to some clause. They will say ABC is in violation of XYZ. 3) If your game fails you can get a real live person on the phone or via email to discuss the issue and what would be an acceptable change. 4) Nintendo not only test that your game is compliant, they will test it for functionality and quality too. This is completely the opposite to Apple who will happily allow buggy pieces of crap on the store that meet their guidelines. 5) Nintendo provide comprehensive access to documents and newsgroups that contain examples of common problems and suggestions, from the staff who test the games, in how to avoid them. There are more I can think of, but these are the big differences. Frankly trying to suggest that Apple's process is in some way better than Nintendo's is just a crock.
- masterj 17y ago
  Some very good points, but something to keep in mind. There is a much lower bar to creating a phone application than a console application, leading to many, many times the number of applications that Apple must look at compared to Nintendo. To provide that same level of attention and care that Nintendo gives to developers for one of it's (few) products to app developers would be impossible for a company of Apple's size. Not that I don't think they couldn't do some of the above, and 2 should be a given.
  - buster 17y ago
    First, the point of that is to reduce the number of applications. Second: Apple is much larger then Nintendo, so they have the resources for sure. Anyway, the free approach of the android market is the best way, in my opinion. Oh, and also, that "free" model has worked for quite some years on PCs, Macs and every other computer, so why shouldn't it work just as fine on a mobile phone?
Groxx 17y ago
I've been voicing this side of the App Store argument for a while. Nobody is as closed as game console companies have been, and they've had an absolute stranglehold on a small but complete monopoly of the game systems. And as chadaustin points out, their earlier attempts at openness screwed them over until they locked it down. Not to say I like the App Store policies, as I plan to develop some things for it & Android, and would love to have an open-market portal somewhere. But it does make sense that it exists, and the hostility about it is fairly unbalanced in light of other similar systems.
code_duck 17y ago
The grip Nintendo had on publishers in the US in the 80s was dreadful, as well. By demanding exclusivity with publishers for the US, they ensured that the Sega Master System would stay marginal in this market. It's a shame, because the SMS hardware was superior in every way to the NES.

That was a fun read of an NES game submission...but to compare that with Apple's app store is out of place. Different era, different type of hardware, distribution model, etc. etc. I've submitted games to NOA for the Gameboy Advance and Gamecube - out of the big 3 (NOA, SONY, MS), Nintendo had the most stringent requirements (not as bad as the article though). I enjoyed the article nonetheless.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

nathanb 17y ago
Aw, man, I thought this post had the potential to be interesting. Why'd you have to go and Godwin's Law it?
- j23tom 17y ago
  ehh didn't knew that. But my point was that both: apple's (control everything) and nintendo's policies are simply evil.
  - yan 17y ago
    Saying their policies are "simply evil" completely undermines what it means to be evil.
    - j23tom 17y ago
      maybe not the best words but ... policy to control everything is simply evil. What Apple is doing (kills concurrence) is evil in the purest sense of word 'evil'
      - cubicle67 17y ago
        everybody like to control things. You'd like to make Apple run their store differently, wouldn't you? Perhaps if you had the power to do so you'd like to force them to? Perhaps you'd like to control how they do things? Just to make sure it's done fairly, of course. but seriously, I think your exposure to evil has been pretty limited. What's the worst Apple will do to someone who violates its rules? Remove their app and refuse to deal with them again? pfft! In the scale of things we humans do to each other, that's almost angelic treatment
      - jsz0 17y ago
        I think we need to make up a new word for it. If Apple's policies are evil what is genocide? rape? torture? Obviously I don't think you're putting them on the same ethical level just illustrating the problems of this type of rhetoric.
        j23tom 17y ago
        People here use strong words when it comes to criticize MS. They say how bad MS is and on the other hand how 'cool' is Apple. Isn't that hypocrisy ?
- RevRal 17y ago
  On Godwin's Law from Wikipedia: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." Now I'm really interested to know what he said. I'm guessing he made some comparison between Nintendo, Apple, and, of all things, the Third Reich?

nathanb 17y ago

Nintendo no doubt knew that they had to establish itself in the minds of parents as kid-friendly (though ironically, these days it seems like they're trying to shake the image of the 'kiddy console'). I wonder if a similar statement extends to Apple. Perhaps they're trying to establish themselves as being idiot-friendly, or at least clueless-user-friendly. Makes me wonder if the irony also applies and they will eventually have to go to great lengths to shake the image of being too dumbed down.

MrRage 17y ago

That may be true but no Nintendo console has been hailed as the future of computing. They're just game consoles.

patio11 17y ago
My mother, who survived a stroke five years ago, spends an hour a day doing physical rehabilitation on her Wii. Her doctors say it has helped her balance, coordination, and confidence. It is the cheapest intervention that has produced the most improvement in her life, and by extension the lives of my whole family. Not bad for a game console.
- pw 17y ago
  "It is the cheapest intervention that has produced the most improvement in her life" Amazing. What games is she using?

chadaustin 17y ago

Somewhere on Keith Boesky's games industry analysis blog ( http://boesky.blogspot.com/ http://boesky.blogspot.com/ ) he draws a parallel between Nintendo's and Apple's "slightly open" marketplaces. During the games industry crash in the 80s ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_video_game_crash_of_1983 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_video_game_crash... ) there were a glut of low-quality products, causing consumers to turn away from video games. Nintendo entered the scene with a restrictive game approval process - remember the Nintendo Seal of Quality? - reducing the number of games while increasing their quality. In effect, he argues a "slightly open" marketplace rebuilt consumer confidence and raised the Nintendo platform's value. If you look at the App Store today, there is a closed loop between the iPhone consumer marketplace, app developers, and the App Store platform. Apple's permeable nozzle on app submission increases the value of the platform while leaving most of a free market in place. This draws consumers, increasing the value to app developers. In short, a slightly-restricted platform can be good for everyone. I wish I could find the specific article. Keith Boesky is a little tl;dr but quite insightful. I'd love to hear counterarguments too.

wvenable 17y ago
I wish they still had the Nintendo Seal of Quality -- there is a flood of crappy games available for the Wii (and similarly the Gamecube before it). Those seriously hurt Nintendo's brand. The worst part of Apple's approval process is that it does very little to improve the quality of the apps. The crap still gets approved if it satisfies Apple's limited criteria. It's pretty clear the benefit for the approval is for Apple and not the consumer.
_delirium 17y ago
Does Apple's approval process actually have that effect, though? The feedback I'm hearing from game devs is the exact opposite of that with Nintendo: Apple lets basically anything through, so long as it doesn't run afoul of a few specific criteria (no porn, no embedded scripting, etc.), regardless of quality. That makes the marketplace as a whole sort of a sludge of junk where it's hard to differentiate yourself--- in contrast to Nintendo's WiiWare, which only releases games that Nintendo considers good enough.
17y ago

mortenjorck 17y ago

My, how things have changed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFNJfDGSZp0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFNJfDGSZp0 Yes, that character at the end gets stabbed through the skull with a sign post.

Batsu 17y ago
To provide an earlier example (2001): Conker's Bad Fur Day (NWS for language, I guess): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0w5neFPat1w http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0w5neFPat1w Pretty much anything you can find out about that game is along the same lines.
chaosmachine 17y ago
I'm not sure that's significantly more violent than MK2 which was on the SNES back in 1993. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucBGKcD78iY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucBGKcD78iY

jrockway 17y ago

Exactly; closed systems suck. There's a reason why there are only a handful of good NES games but that there are thousnads of good PC games.

ajg1977 17y ago

While both are stringent and designed to protect consumers, I'm not sure there are many other parallels between the processes of Apple and Nintendo. As a developer who's gone through the process of submitting games many times to Nintendo, these are why it's a far better process than Apple have. (Note these all apply to Sony/Microsoft too). 1) You can send Nintendo a proposed game design before starting any work and they will approve/deny it. Depending on how much detail you provide, you may only get a conditional approval, but you can submit more information or revisit later in development. If your game never stands a chance of being published, you'll have wasted nothing more than the time to create the documents. 2) If Nintendo have a problem with your game, they will tell you exactly what the issue is. There's no ambiguous reference to some clause. They will say ABC is in violation of XYZ. 3) If your game fails you can get a real live person on the phone or via email to discuss the issue and what would be an acceptable change. 4) Nintendo not only test that your game is compliant, they will test it for functionality and quality too. This is completely the opposite to Apple who will happily allow buggy pieces of crap on the store that meet their guidelines. 5) Nintendo provide comprehensive access to documents and newsgroups that contain examples of common problems and suggestions, from the staff who test the games, in how to avoid them. There are more I can think of, but these are the big differences. Frankly trying to suggest that Apple's process is in some way better than Nintendo's is just a crock.

masterj 17y ago
Some very good points, but something to keep in mind. There is a much lower bar to creating a phone application than a console application, leading to many, many times the number of applications that Apple must look at compared to Nintendo. To provide that same level of attention and care that Nintendo gives to developers for one of it's (few) products to app developers would be impossible for a company of Apple's size. Not that I don't think they couldn't do some of the above, and 2 should be a given.
- buster 17y ago
  First, the point of that is to reduce the number of applications. Second: Apple is much larger then Nintendo, so they have the resources for sure. Anyway, the free approach of the android market is the best way, in my opinion. Oh, and also, that "free" model has worked for quite some years on PCs, Macs and every other computer, so why shouldn't it work just as fine on a mobile phone?

Groxx 17y ago

I've been voicing this side of the App Store argument for a while. Nobody is as closed as game console companies have been, and they've had an absolute stranglehold on a small but complete monopoly of the game systems. And as chadaustin points out, their earlier attempts at openness screwed them over until they locked it down. Not to say I like the App Store policies, as I plan to develop some things for it & Android, and would love to have an open-market portal somewhere. But it does make sense that it exists, and the hostility about it is fairly unbalanced in light of other similar systems.

code_duck 17y ago

The grip Nintendo had on publishers in the US in the 80s was dreadful, as well. By demanding exclusivity with publishers for the US, they ensured that the Sega Master System would stay marginal in this market. It's a shame, because the SMS hardware was superior in every way to the NES.